Mesaĝoj: 38
Lingvo: English
Greyshades (Montri la profilon) 2010-marto-26 15:21:38
First off, Ĉar vs. Pro.
Both these words mean "because" but can be used in different ways. Which ways are these? And more so, are they interchangable or not? If not, why? How can I not use "ĉar" where "pro" belongs, and vice versa?
Hopefully we can clarify this once and for all
tommjames (Montri la profilon) 2010-marto-26 15:30:15
"Ĉar" is a conjunction which introduces the following clause as the cause of something. Example: mi ŝatas Esperanton ĉar ĝi estas facila. In this example the clause "ĝi estas simpla" is the reason you like Esperanto.
"Pro" also introduces a cause, but the cause has to be an actual thing rather than a grammatical proposition. You could say mi ŝatas Esperanton pro ĝia simpleco". Here, "ĝia simpleco" is the reason you like Esperanto.
I don't think this distinction is something only apparent to experts, but you can make your own judgment.
trojo (Montri la profilon) 2010-marto-26 15:49:33
Greyshades:First off, Ĉar vs. Pro.Well, "Ĉar" ("because") is a conjunction, and "Pro" ("due to" or "because of") is a preposition. This is a grammatical distinction though, not really a logical one. "Pro mia eraro" and "Ĉar mi eraris" are logically saying the same thing, just in a different way grammatically. Still, since they are different parts of speech you can't interchange them willy-nilly.
Both these words mean "because" but can be used in different ways. Which ways are these? And more so, are they interchangable or not? If not, why? How can I not use "ĉar" where "pro" belongs, and vice versa?
However, it is very common to see people write or say "Pro tio, ke..." instead of "Ĉar". (E.g. "Mi havas neniom da mono pro tio, ke mi ne plu laboras"). "Pro tio, ke..." I mentally translate as "due to the fact that...", which in English is just an unnecessarily wordy way to say "because". If there is a logical distinction in Esperanto between "Ĉar" and "Pro tio, ke", it escapes me.
In fact there are a whole bunch of conjunctions that could be replaced with a preposition + ke. For example, "kvankam" ("although") more or less means "malgraŭ tio, ke" ("despite the fact that").
qwertz (Montri la profilon) 2010-marto-26 16:33:19
Greyshades:I'm thinking of developing this into a series of grammar wars... things that don't appear simple in Esperanto to anyone other than an expert.Hhm, "series of grammar wars". Why not more sports like i.e. grammar ping pong. Also excist at the computer field. The world still "owns" enough wars. Doesn't need some more else.
ceigered (Montri la profilon) 2010-marto-26 16:40:46
.My simple world view on the matter:
Ĉar = because
Pro = because of.
Ĉar = used with whatever the heck you want
Pro = nouns only.
tommjames (Montri la profilon) 2010-marto-26 17:45:16
ceigered:Ĉar = used with whatever the heck you wantNah, ĉar goes before clauses only. Of course a clause might begin with a noun, but ĉar works on the clause as a whole and not individual words within in. You would never say mi ŝatas Esperanton ĉar ĝia simpleco, it would always be pro. As far as I know a single noun doesn't count as a valid grammatical proposition but I might be wrong. In any case you never see that in practice.
qwertz (Montri la profilon) 2010-marto-26 17:52:28
ceigered:Because, qwertz, I doubt there would be any English speaker who'd say "grammar ping pong" - yes, we're all warlike and barbaric like that and prefer to say "war"Okay, it's your forum, english natives. I would never call your matter in German: "Grammatik Krieg" (=grammar war).
ceigered (Montri la profilon) 2010-marto-27 03:51:25
qwertz:Okay, it's your forum, english natives. I would never call your matter in German: "Grammatik Krieg" (=grammar war).What is said in German by the way, if you don't mind me asking?
@ Tommjames - yeah good point. "Cxar gxia simpleco" really does irk me. I think I was thinking a long the lines of "Cxar gxi estas simpla" and went 'NOUNS!'
But "cxar" is probably the more flexible option, yes? (I mean, you can't really phrase many things with just nouns and adjectives without sounding artificial can you?)
tommjames (Montri la profilon) 2010-marto-27 10:20:45
ceigered:But "cxar" is probably the more flexible option, yes?Hmm, I'm not really sure how you'd assess the "flexibility" of ĉar, or indeed what you mean by it. Could you clarify?
To me it's fairly clear cut. If the cause/reason is an identifiable thing, then use "pro". If it's a statement of fact, then use "ĉar". I don't really see much flexibility to deviate from that.
qwertz (Montri la profilon) 2010-marto-27 10:32:19
ceigered:Sorry, I don't understand your question correctly "...if you don't mind me asking?"qwertz:Okay, it's your forum, english natives. I would never call your matter in German: "Grammatik Krieg" (=grammar war).What is said in German by the way, if you don't mind me asking?
In German they could call it "Ping Pong Grammatik #X: Ĉar vs. Pro". But I never heard about such discussion. But I just joined to esperanto 2 years ago.
Any opinions by german/austrian lernu.net users?
In my opinion sports are a very proper replacements for wars. You're lucky folks that no wars happen nearby you. Using australian distance understanding the Bosnia War just happened around the corner. Sarajevo is still 1000 km from Munich. So, wars are not fun. UEFA Soccer keep us "batteling" enough.
Btw. The New York Times use the Ping-Pong Diplomacy expression. So, the "Ping-Pong+XXX" is known and used by at least one english native.
TheNewYorkTimes March 2, 2010
A member of the U.S. table tennis team known for visiting China in 1971 and fostering Ping-Pong Diplomacy starts a Ping-Pong league on Roosevelt Island.