Al la enhavo
Respondi

Anybody ever heard "Estintus"?

de Polaris, 2009-decembro-29

Mesaĝoj: 13

Lingvo: English

Polaris (Montri la profilon) 2009-decembro-29 12:19:38

I love the way words can be used creatively in Esperanto, yet still be understood. But I ran into this on the Spanish forum, and I'm wondering if this isn't "pushing the envelope" way beyond the pale of acceptable usage. The writer apparently wanted to say "it would have been nice", so he wrote "estintus ja agrable ".

I understand this, but is it correct Esperanto? I didn't think we could put verb endings on participles (which are formed from verbs to begin with). I'm not asking to be critical--just trying to learn. Any style police out there who can clear this up for me?

tommjames (Montri la profilon) 2009-decembro-29 12:42:02

Estintus is perfectly acceptable. The shortened forms are more a feature of modern usage than classical, but there's nothing incorrect about them. If you search in Tekstaro with the search string \\Bintus\\b you'll find many examples of it being used.

Further reading: http://bertilow.com/pmeg/pmeg140/gramatiko/parti...

Miland (Montri la profilon) 2009-decembro-29 16:48:50

Polaris:I'm wondering if this isn't "pushing the envelope" .. is it correct Esperanto?
It would be technically correct Esperanto, but as pointed out in PMEG (2nd sentence after the third box), this kind of verb ending is not readily understandable. I suggest simply using estus agrable and supplying any context that may be necessary e.g. tiam or je tiu tempo. See PMEG 28.4.3 (last sentence in the last box but one).

darkweasel (Montri la profilon) 2009-decembro-29 17:08:35

Oh yes, Miland, this kind of verb ending is easily understandable, and even PMEG, which you linked to, says that this is commonly used:
Kelkaj tiaj mallongigitaj formoj efektive praktike iom enuziĝis. Precipe INTUS-formoj estas popularaj. Simpla US-formo estas tute sentempa, sed multaj tamen sentas US-verbojn kiel nuntempajn, kaj uzas INTUS ĉiam, kiam temas pri pasinteco[.]
Translation: Some such shortened forms effectively found some use in practice. Above all INTUS-forms are popular. A simple US-form is temporally completely neutral, but many nevertheless consider US-verbs as present tense, and use INTUS always when they talk about the past.

ceigered (Montri la profilon) 2009-decembro-29 17:24:36

darkweasel: this kind of verb ending is easily understandable
If you're referring to -intus, I wouldn't say it's easily understandable unless you speak a language with deals with complex verb forms in a more precise manner :-/

Anyway, -intus seems good for technical writing purposes or for when speaking with people who use it regularly, but I'd choose -us normally out of simplicity and not wanting to hurt people's heads (like my own okulumo.gif).

darkweasel (Montri la profilon) 2009-decembro-29 17:28:07

Even English uses something like -intus. estintus = would have been

horsto (Montri la profilon) 2009-decembro-29 18:18:06

I think a lot of people use these complicated forms because they try to translate the complicated forms from their native language. They don't pay atention to the fact, that the simple -us form in Esperanto is temporally neutral, as PMEG writes.

Miland (Montri la profilon) 2009-decembro-29 19:25:00

darkweasel:Oh yes, Miland, this kind of verb ending is easily understandable..
That is not what PMEG says: Bedaŭrinde ili estas en la praktiko tre malfacile kompreneblaj. "Unfortunately they are very difficult to understand in practice." Esperanto is meant to be accessible to most people, not just the fortunate few who can immediately comprehend words like legintos.

darkweasel:PMEG, which you linked to, says that this is commonly used:
Kelkaj tiaj mallongigitaj formoj efektive praktike iom enuziĝis.
"Iom" does not mean "commonly". It means "a little bit".

RiotNrrd (Montri la profilon) 2009-decembro-29 20:17:49

The -intus form may in general be difficult to understand, but I frequently run across "devintus" and "estintus". I just memorized those two words, and behold! When I run across them, I know what they mean! Without difficulty!

So, I agree with the sentiment that -intus words should be generally avoided. However, it is clear (to me, in any event) that the two words mentioned above are used relatively commonly, are therefore generally understood, and so do not need to be avoided like "legintus" would be.

darkweasel (Montri la profilon) 2009-decembro-29 20:31:55

Miland:Esperanto is meant to be accessible to most people, not just the fortunate few who can immediately comprehend words like legintos.
We aren't talking about "legintos" but about "estintus".

In practice I see -intus forms commonly used, and they are not too hard to understand. You're however right that "legintos" IS hard to understand - "estintus" isn't.

Reen al la supro