Sadržaj
Odgovori

To Be or NOT To Be (Avoiding the word Esti?)

od Polaris, 30. prosinca 2010.

Poruke: 30

Jezik: English

Polaris (Prikaz profila) 30. prosinca 2010. 06:21:33

Okay, gang, what gives...do Esperantists tend to not like the word "esti"? I keep seeing the following:

1. Instead translating a form of "to be" followed by an adjective/adverb, I keep seeing adjectives made into verbs (I.E. "strangas" instead of "esti stranga")

2. I keep seeing -iĝi endings used with adjectives, again, in an apparent attempt to avoid a (to be)+(adjective) construction (I.E. "interesiĝas").

It seems that I see these constructions all the time. What I'd really like to know is if there is some rule in Esperanto that specifically addresses this. I don't expect Esperanto to be like English, but I'd really like to know what's going on with this....thanks.

Genjix (Prikaz profila) 30. prosinca 2010. 06:24:21

estas bona -> bonas

That's it i think. I use it because it looks nicer. mi & estas is probably the biggest reason why people call Esperanto, bastardised Spanish.

Pk_JoA (Prikaz profila) 30. prosinca 2010. 06:40:54

I use words like that just because it is shorter, so...

PS: In spanish we do tend to use a lot the verb "to be" (ser / estar) so I don't know if that would be a reason for calling esperanto bastardized Spanish.

RiotNrrd (Prikaz profila) 30. prosinca 2010. 06:42:49

I think it's mainly a stylistic choice. Obviously, "esti" works just fine. But sometimes using an alternative seems somehow a bit more elegant and/or concise.

I tend to try and cram as much meaning into as few words as possible (in Esperanto, not necessarily in English; something I also do in code as a professional software developer), and so quite frequently use the forms you mentioned instead of "esti". But I don't think there's any rule about it.

If you like using "esti", go ahead and use it all you want.

ceigered (Prikaz profila) 30. prosinca 2010. 07:47:36

I use esti and -Vs formats in random distribution, mostly using -Vs in lieu of esti when I am feeling entirely certain that not only will the -Vs usage not be confused with some sort of transitive usage or will not result in a too cluttered or long word.

sudanglo (Prikaz profila) 30. prosinca 2010. 11:25:47

There isn't a rule as such, Polaris, but the direct verbigo of Esperanto (non-verbal) roots is very natural in Esperanto, because this is just a reflection of a basic mechanism in Esperanto.

All words in Esperanto are a sufficient combination of roots to convey ones meaning.

Zamenhof actually said that the grammatical finaĵoj are 'words' like other roots.

So 'grando' is the meaning of 'grand' + the meaning of 'o'.

In the cases where the root already contains the meaning of the finaĵo, the finaĵo does not add meaning, but is conventionally retained for its role in marking function in the sentence.)

But 'estas X-a' does not actually equate directly with 'X-as', even if X is an adjectival notion. 'X-as' carries the meaning of 'as'.

Whatever X is, 'X-as' presents it as a verbal notion, whilst 'estas X-a' presents X in a stative descriptive form (ie X plus the idea of 'a').

Sometimes 'estas X-a' will seem to be little more than 'X-as', other times there will be a big difference - it depends on X and the nature of the world.

Obviously Ĉu vi biciklis ĉi tien? doesn't equate to Ĉu vi estis bicikla ĉi tien.

But 'Frostas hodiaŭ' does mean something like 'La vetero estas frosta'

horsto (Prikaz profila) 30. prosinca 2010. 12:27:30

I think it's not a good idea to always use the x-as form instead of estas. Also PMEG recommends:
PMEG:Oni ne trouzu tiajn verbojn, ĉar tiam la speciala nuanco povus malaperi, kaj la lingvo malriĉiĝus. Ekz. oni normale ne diras la ĉielo bluas, sed la ĉielo estas blua. Oni ŝparu la verban formon por specialaj efektoj.
That means, if you too often use this x-as form, then the special nuance of this form could disappear and that would make the language less rich.
You should use the x-as forms only for special effects.

Roberto12 (Prikaz profila) 30. prosinca 2010. 12:39:31

What sudanglo and horsto said.

(Good question.)

erinja (Prikaz profila) 30. prosinca 2010. 15:18:40

As for "interesiĝas", the alternative is a bit clunky, so in my opinion, that's why people often say "interesiĝas"

I am interested in cats:
Mi interesiĝas pri katoj

In the "estas" form:
Mi estas interesita pri katoj

Without "estas" or "iĝ":
Katoj interesas min

(note that it is *NOT* "Mi estas interesa pri katoj" - interesa = interesting. In this case, I am not interesting; cats are interesting. "Katoj estas interesaj por mi", Cats are interesting for me)

(the participle endings are also generally avoided unless they're needed, which is another vote for "interesiĝas" in lieu of "estas interesita". In modern Esperanto usage, -iĝ- has seen increased use, and estas -ita has seen decreased use)

Iretka (Prikaz profila) 30. prosinca 2010. 21:14:13

erinja:As for "interesiĝas", the alternative is a bit clunky, so in my opinion, that's why people often say "interesiĝas"

I am interested in cats:
Mi interesiĝas pri katoj

In the "estas" form:
Mi estas interesita pri katoj
I'm sorry of my awful English, but I only wondered if "mi estas interesita" wouldn't mean that I was interesed in past. Wouldn't be a better option "mi estas interesata pri katoj"?

Pardonu mian malbonegan anglalingvoskribadon lango.gif
Mi nur volas demandi: ĉu la frazo "mi estas interesita" ne signifus ke "mi antaǔe estis interesata"? Ĉu ne pli ĝuste oni diru "mi estas interesata" anstataǔ la alia verbformo?

Natrag na vrh