Mesaĝoj: 23
Lingvo: English
Miland (Montri la profilon) 2010-januaro-19 12:53:28
Here is a list of instructive examples showing alternatives to the preposition de, based on Teach yourself Esperanto. In each case the alternative to de is given in italics. For beginners, note that de is not wrong in itself, and its meaning may well often be clear from the context.
1. La problemo pri la senarmiĝo
("The problem of disarmament")
2. Li venas el Germanio.
("He comes from Germany.")
3. Li kuris for de la domo. (aŭ, Li forkuris de la domo).
("He ran from the house.")
4. La vazo falis de sur la tablo.
("The vase fell from the table.")
5. Li laboras tie ekde januaro.
("He's been working there since January.")
6. Li suferis pro febro.
("He is suffering from fever.")
7. Ni ne povas distingi liajn ŝafojn disde la niaj.
("We are unable to distinguish his sheep from ours.")
8. En 1066 okazis la venko de Anglio fare de la Normandanoj.
("In 1066 occurred the conquest of England by the Normans.")
Vilinilo (Montri la profilon) 2010-januaro-19 21:36:18
"disde"? "fare"?
Frankouche (Montri la profilon) 2010-januaro-19 22:01:18
Miland:En 1066 okazis la venko de Anglio fare de la Normandanoj.La venko de Anglio aŭ la venko de normandanoj ? Kiu venkis kiun ?
("In 1066 occurred the conquest of England by the Normans.")
Ĉu ne estas "la konkeraĵo de Anglio fare de normandanoj" ?
Aŭ "La venko de normandanoj kontraŭ Anglio" ?
Hic Willelm dux...
Miland (Montri la profilon) 2010-januaro-19 22:53:40
Vilinilo:I don't get numbers #7 and #8Disde here means "from". Another example might be La ekzameno bone distingis la ŝafojn disde la kaproj.
"disde"? "fare"?
Fare de here means "done by".
Another example might be La kreado de la retpaĝo estis fare de teamo, ne unu homo.
Miland (Montri la profilon) 2010-januaro-19 22:56:55
Frankouche:La venko de Anglio aŭ la venko de la normandanoj?This is precisely why fare de is used instead of de. It tells us who is responsible for an act. A person who is responsible for accomplishing a victory is the victor. That is why venko fare de la Normandianoj can only means "victory accomplished by the Normans".
Frankouche (Montri la profilon) 2010-januaro-19 23:03:34
Miland:For me, "la venko de Anglio" means "the victory of England", or "England wins". "Venko de X" means "X wins", not "X is defeated by".Frankouche:La venko de Anglio aŭ la venko de la normandanoj?This is precisely why fare de is used instead of de. It tells us who is responsible for an act. A person who is responsible for accomplishing a victory is the victor. That is why venko fare de la Normandianoj can only means "victory accomplished by the Normans".
Frankouche (Montri la profilon) 2010-januaro-19 23:12:10
Miland (Montri la profilon) 2010-januaro-20 01:14:24
Frankrouche:Venko de, "conquest of " is ambiguous. It can be interpreted as either defeat or victory. The historical context can resolve the meaning of de.
If you wanted to remove all ambiguity you could have En 1066 okazis la venko kontraŭ Anglio fare de la Normandanoj. This would be another example of resolving the ambiguity in de by using an alternative preposition.
patrik (Montri la profilon) 2010-januaro-20 04:44:28
Vilinilo:I don't get numbers #7 and #8"disde" is something like "as separate from".
"disde"? "fare"?
Is "elinter" a good idea as well?:
Mi prenis vin elinter la plimulto.
("I took you from among the majority.")
ceigered (Montri la profilon) 2010-januaro-20 09:45:28
"La venko de la anglo-saksonanoj kontraŭ la britoj faris historion" makes perfect sense to me - the victory of the Anglo-Saxons against the Britons made history. Generally, the victor is associated with their victory. If we want to say "the victory of Britain" as in "the victory which occurred in Britain" we can say "la venko en britio", if we want to say "the victory of britain by the Anglo-Saxons" then we can say "la malvenko de la britoj"
Of course, I think fare de works just as well, but it doesn't seem better or worse than "de+kontraŭ" methods (it may be arguably more precise, but also more confusing if we start to regard "venko de" as referring to both the winner and the loser. After all, the victory doesn't belong to the loser, does it? I mean, over-thinking things, the loser could share some form of possession of the victory, but its making things complex)And thanks for disde - I forgot it existed!