ورود به محتوا
پاسخ دادن

Transitive or not?

از Miland, 27 نوامبر 2009

پست‌ها: 4

زبان: English

Miland (نمایش مشخصات) 27 نوامبر 2009،‏ 15:19:43

The verb aborti is described as intransitive in Wells and Butler (and Benson). This is consistent with the uses of abortigi in Monato found in the tekstaro.

PIV 2005 describes it as transitive, but allows a second intransitive 'special' meaning for halted development or evolution. But it also has abortigi for causing a miscarriage, which is consistent with allowing the second use in a wider sense.

The tekstaro (in Zamenhof's Old Testament) contains two uses of the passive participle indicating transitivity.

The French verb avorter is transitive according to some dictionaries, but not others. So there may be a difference between English and French usage that is reflected in Esperanto usage.

What is your view?

tommjames (نمایش مشخصات) 27 نوامبر 2009،‏ 16:24:42

I support the intransitive definition because the use of ig allows us to distinguish between the involuntary act of miscarrying, and the deliberate act of having an abortion. So we have:

aborti = to miscarry
abortigi = to abort (intentionally)

If the verb were transitive I'm not sure how something like aborti feton would be clear as to a miscarriage or an abortion.

erinja (نمایش مشخصات) 28 نوامبر 2009،‏ 0:25:04

Miland:PIV 2005 describes it as transitive, but allows a second intransitive 'special' meaning for halted development or evolution. But it also has abortigi for causing a miscarriage, which is consistent with allowing the second use in a wider sense.
Why not just believe the PIV without question, since Marjorie Boulton thinks it's a good dictionary, and since Akademianoj contributed to it?

Miland (نمایش مشخصات) 28 نوامبر 2009،‏ 0:49:09

erinja:Why not just believe the PIV without question, since Marjorie Boulton thinks it's a good dictionary, and since Akademianoj contributed to it?
Good suggestion. Feel free to do that.

بازگشت به بالا