Mesaĝoj: 88
Lingvo: English
mihxil (Montri la profilon) 2010-oktobro-14 11:23:10
sudanglo:"La kiu vi estas" obviously does not make sense already because 'La vi' is not possible. In any length it is therefore a very bad example. Somebody even suggested that 'La kioma horo' connects 'la' with 'kioma', which is of course also a rather odd way of looking at it. Obviously 'la' belongs to 'kioma' just as much as it belongs to 'bruna' in 'la bruna hundo'.
La kioma horo estas doesn't make sense anymore than La kiu vi estas makes sense.
But the other reason is that 'kiu' and 'tiu' are 'difiniloj' themselves. So they are like 'la', and therefore cannot be combined with it.
For 'kioma' this is not valid. It is an adjective. And 'estas' is used just as in 'Mi pensas, do mi estas' , so more or less only meaning 'to exist' or 'being real'. 'Esti' is not only used to connect the subject with a predicate.
So "La kioma horo estas"? There are 24 hours imaginable, but onely one them is currently the real hour. I think it makes perfect sence to ask it like that.
I will avoid saying it, because it is 'uncommon', but I don't see that it is even grammaticly wrong.
sudanglo (Montri la profilon) 2010-oktobro-14 11:28:58
I can't see in what sense 'kio' as a question word is a difinilo.
Of course, Kiu in relative clauses can serve to define.
My point was, it makes a difference where you put the definite article.
Would there be any questions beginning with a Ki-word that could be preceded with 'la'?
sudanglo (Montri la profilon) 2010-oktobro-14 11:38:38
Can you make a sensible question that begins 'La kia hundo .....?'
darkweasel (Montri la profilon) 2010-oktobro-14 11:44:34
sudanglo:Let's be clear about this.Kiu vi estas? - Mi estas darkweasel. (not *la darkweasel)
La kioma horo estas doesn't make sense anymore than La kiu vi estas makes sense.
La kioma horo estas? - Estas la tria horo.
tommjames (Montri la profilon) 2010-oktobro-14 11:47:31
sudanglo:Tom if you don't like my example of 'la kiu' then change it to 'la Kio ĝi estas?'"La kio ĝi estas" doesn't appear grammatically wrong to me, and precisely for the reason you point out; that "kio" isn't a difinilo. Of course you will almost never hear a phrase like that, but I don't see how it breaks any rules. It's simply whimsical usage. If Person A says "Ĝi estas la plej bona en la mondo" and Person B responds "Ĝi estas la kio???" you're getting into some pretty extreme pedantry, IMO, if you claim person B is speaking wrongly because the article wasn't strictly required.
I can't see in what sense 'kio' as a question word is a difinilo.
darkweasel (Montri la profilon) 2010-oktobro-14 11:51:02
sudanglo:Well Mihxil to make a comparison that seems more direct with 'kioma', let's think about question sentences that begin with 'La kia'.No. But not because it would be ungrammatical, but because kia always implies that you're talking about something indefinite.
Can you make a sensible question that begins 'La kia hundo .....?'
mihxil (Montri la profilon) 2010-oktobro-14 11:55:08
sudanglo:Well Mihxil to make a comparison that seems more direct with 'kioma', let's think about question sentences that begin with 'La kia'.You would also not answer it with 'la'.
Can you make a sensible question that begins 'La kia hundo .....?'
-Kia hundo estas ĝi?
-Ĝi estas bruna hundo.
Kia is also a 'difinilo' according to PMEG.
But I think tabelvortoj with '-a' are more or less indefinite by nature, because they are about classes of things. So the definite article has no place.
sudanglo (Montri la profilon) 2010-oktobro-14 12:12:45
A search through over 20 million words from a variety of corpuses (at CorpusEye) produced only two possibly acceptable instances of 'la kioma' and none of 'La kioma' (beginning the sentence).
De la kioma etaĝo vi estas ? ŝi demandis
Ĉu vi scias, miaj karuloj, la kioma estas hodiaŭ ? (this require a date answer)
By the way whether you answer a Ki- question with a definite article in the answer has little bearing on the grammatical role of the Ki-question word.
Kio ĝi estas - ĝi etas internacia lingvo
Kio ĝi estas - ĝi estas la plej bela lingvo en la mondo.
Kioma hora estas - estas horo por enlitiĝi
Kioma horo estas - dek post la tria.
Miland (Montri la profilon) 2010-oktobro-14 12:37:40
mihxil:The first line from PMEG about 'la':The alparolato only knows it when it is pointed out to him. That is the questioner. The questioner does not know it, and cannot use it to point to anything.
La vorteton la oni nomas difina artikolo. Ĝi montras, ke oni parolas pri certa afero konata de la alparolato..
mihxil:By the way how would any one point to an hour?The expression 'point to' means 'indicate'. That is what la is doing.
Your support of la kioma horo estas is plain wrong. What is silly is not my argument, but your failure to accept legitimate correction and act on it. Unless you do, your Esperanto will not make progress. In this matter, in particular, it will remain defective.
mihxil (Montri la profilon) 2010-oktobro-14 13:09:55
miland:You were making an example with 'houses' and that it is silly to point into the air. I was just going along with that.
mihxil:By the way how would any one point to an hour?The expression 'point to' means 'indicate'. That is what la is doing.
Anyhow, I think your error is that you are insisting that 'la' is indicating that something is specified. It does not, it only indicates that something is definite, and that we agree on what precisely we're talking about. I made an error when I went along with you and tried to use your own logic to proof you wrong, and pointed out that for the 'alparolato' presumably the hour is specified. It is still true, but perhaps not very relevant.
It is only of importance, when using 'la' whether the thing to which is referred is uniquely defined. So, you can talk about 'la horo' and e.g. 'la temperaturo' even without having specified their exact values. Even if I don't know the time, I do know that there is a time. You are trying to argue that the time for the one asking the time logically cannot have 'la' because it is not defined or unknown. It makes no sense.
miland:How nice. These 'arguments'.
Your support of la kioma horo estas is plain wrong. What is silly is not my argument, but your failure to accept legitimate correction and act on it. Unless you do, your Esperanto will not make progress. In this matter, in particular, it will remain defective.