Meldinger: 386
Språk: English
darkweasel (Å vise profilen) 2011 3 9 19:16:01
A better example sentence is the following from §35 of the Ekzercaro.
Vi parolas sensencaĵon, mia amiko.
razlem (Å vise profilen) 2011 3 9 19:19:29
You're overthinking it. You aren't speaking Esperanto-ly. You speak a language.
'I speak English' and 'I speak Englishly' are two different things. The latter would imply that you're speaking with an English accent or with English grammar, as opposed to the language proper.
T0dd (Å vise profilen) 2011 3 9 19:33:35
darkweasel:Logically it would need to be mi parolas Esperante.
A better example sentence is the following from §35 of the Ekzercaro.
Vi parolas sensencaĵon, mia amiko.Or simply Mi parolas la anglan lingvon.
Clearly, paroli does take a direct object.
T0dd (Å vise profilen) 2011 3 9 19:42:36
Miland:I simply don't see it. An indirect object presupposes a direct object, stated or implied. Verbs that have indirect objects involve acting on a direct object in a manner that is somehow directed to someone or something else. You send a letter (d.o.) to someone (i.o.); give something (d.o.) to someone (i.o.), etc. When there's an indirect object, there are three beings in play. There's the agent, the thing acted upon, and some further being affected by that thing.T0dd:"To feed on corn" is to eat corn, no?.Agreed. I would say that "on" has semantic value here, making corn an indirect object.
Feeding on corn is between you and the corn; there's no third being involved. To feed on is simply to eat. The concepts are identical. If the concept of eating is transitive, the mere presence of "on" with "feed" doesn't change that concept. It's not as though you stand in some different relation to the corn when you feed on it, as opposed to when you eat it.
T0dd (Å vise profilen) 2011 3 9 19:44:14
razlem:"Logically it would need to be mi parolas Esperante."Esperanto makes extensive use of adverbs, in ways that at first seem strange to anglophones. Mi parolas Esperante is in fact very commonly used. But it's not obligatory.
You're overthinking it. You aren't speaking Esperanto-ly. You speak a language.
'I speak English' and 'I speak Englishly' are two different things. The latter would imply that you're speaking with an English accent or with English grammar, as opposed to the language proper.
Miland (Å vise profilen) 2011 3 9 19:49:39
T0dd:When there's an indirect object, there are three beings in play.I wouldn't agree with that, because, for example, when we say La manĝaĵo plaĉas al mi, there are only two beings in play. Yet plaĉi is intransitive, and mi is an indirect object. In Esperanto it is possible to have an indirect object without a third being in play.
T0dd (Å vise profilen) 2011 3 9 20:03:18
Miland:And when we say La manĝaĵo plaĉas min...what then?T0dd:When there's an indirect object, there are three beings in play.I wouldn't agree with that, because, for example, when we say La manĝaĵo plaĉas al mi, there are only two beings in play. Yet plaĉi is intransitive, and mi is an indirect object. In Esperanto it is possible to have an indirect object without a third being in play.
I think you're confusing phrasal verbs with verbs that take an indirect object. In a phrasal verb, the preposition acts simply as a part of the verb, creating a single unit.
In English, we must use "to" with "listen", as in "I listen to the music." The presence of "to" doesn't make "the music" an indirect object. In Esperanto, we don't use a preposition. We use "Mi aŭskultas la muzikon" to say exactly the same thing. "Listen to" happens to be a phrasal verb in English, but not in Esperanto (or French). The same goes for the English "look at" and Esperanto rigardi.
Miland (Å vise profilen) 2011 3 9 20:30:17
T0dd:And when we say La manĝaĵo plaĉas min...what then?Here the accusative ending is taking the part of the preposition al. But the object remains indirect, and the verb intransitive. I would deny that plaĉi is a (transitive) phrasal verb.
T0dd:In English, we must use "to" with "listen", as in "I listen to the music." The presence of "to" doesn't make "the music" an indirect object.Esperanto is not English.
T0dd (Å vise profilen) 2011 3 9 22:28:24
Miland:Esperanto is not English.Indeed it isn't, but if transitivity has something to do with the meaning, and isn't an arbitrary convention, then when the meaning is the same across languages, transitivity should be the same too.
sudanglo (Å vise profilen) 2011 3 9 22:41:53
The other direction seems less common. But how about fari and nenifari, manĝi and tagmanĝi, saluti and ensaluti (sign in)
Of course the disappearance of transitivity can take place when we create an adjective from a transitive verbal root -interesi/seninteresa. States and qualities will often be inherently intransitive.
Sometimes two meanings, a transitive and intransitive, one will attach - malferma ceremonio, malferma tago.