Sisu juurde
Vasta

Negative Question

kelle poolt sublimestyle, 31. jaanuar 2011

Postitused: 76

Keel: English

T0dd (Näita profiili) 10. veebruar 2011 13:12.44

I have no problem with this approach. If it is to be taught as the correct way to respond to negative questions in Esperanto, then this should be done explicitly. That is, learners should be taught to ignore the fact that the questions is phrased negatively, and treat it as a positive question. Then it becomes just one more rule of usage.

Of course, this isn't the full story. He does say "...kiam la demando ne atendas precizan respondon". The implication is that the "western" system is used for casual speech, but perhaps not when precision is needed.

So what shall it be?

1. One system for casual speech and another for speech where precision matters.

2. Just treat all negative questions as if they are positive.

3. Answer negative and positive questions differently, as logic would dictate.

ceigered (Näita profiili) 10. veebruar 2011 13:47.11

I like the total anarchy actually. Explication, clarification etc make the problem mute.

ceigered (Näita profiili) 10. veebruar 2011 13:48.23

"Orienta" is a misnomer though - like I said in my post before, it must clearly be named after the Chinese system, where it makes sense since the Chinese word for yes is basically "it is (so)" and the Chinese word for no is basically "it is not (so)".

(however, I wouldn't call it quite the same as calling japanese and koreans "chinamen", since in this case China has influenced all the languages around it just as Latin and Greek did to Europe).

Either way, I think we need better names than just "west" and "east", since one of the most western European languages, Irish, happens to have some traits of the oriental system with "it is" and "it isn't".

EDIT: Sorry, was so lost in all the stuff I was doing I posted twice to the same thing without realising

sudanglo (Näita profiili) 10. veebruar 2011 15:17.40

If only this 'problem' were mute. I think you might mean moot, Ceiger.

There's no anarchy to like, Ceiger (setting aside whether anarchy is a desirable thing in Esperanto usage).

I keep on asking for quotes of dialogue from the literature to support the idea in the PMEG article that there ARE two systems in use for simple factual questions, and nobody comes up with anything. If they were easy to find, I think that Bertilow might have used them.

By the way is it true that the author of PMEG is married to a Korean and lives/has lived for some time in Korea?

erinja (Näita profiili) 10. veebruar 2011 16:04.33

sudanglo, in fact, I haven't spent any time at all looking for literature references, because I just don't care.

As far as I am concerned, if there is a logical basis for doing something, it isn't wrong. Naturally, I wouldn't recommend that a beginner go out and do it, including this negative question thing, without being aware of the possible consequences (=misunderstandings). But only finding a few examples of something in literature does not make it wrong. And I don't agree with your assessment of the explanations found in PMEG. They're perfectly good examples to me. But as I said, I just don't care. This isn't ever so important to me.

-----

Bertilo is married to a German. They lived in Korea for several years, while his wife taught German at a university. At that time they split their time between Korea and Germany. Last I checked they were back in Germany for good, but I last spoke to them a couple of years ago now, and they haven't updated their blog since 2009.

I am sure you could write to Bertilo personally if you would like to ask him for more detail on this matter. And if you're feeling really devoted to the question, you could utilize the question and answer service at the Akademio de Esperanto.

ceigered (Näita profiili) 22. veebruar 2011 1:26.40

sudanglo:If only this 'problem' were mute. I think you might mean moot, Ceiger.

There's no anarchy to like, Ceiger (setting aside whether anarchy is a desirable thing in Esperanto usage).
Ah, moot, thanks (never got how that one's spelt, so I just used "mute" even though I know that the meaning of mute and what I was intending don't correlate well).

Sure there's anarchy to like. If there was no anarchy at all we'd be treated like machines and wouldn't be able to reply to each other right now unless whoever was controlling us decided it should happen rido.gif (although whether anarchy in fact exists, or is just a human interpretation of a flow of many discreet influences, or whether in fact all structure is anarchy is another argument entirey)

Tagasi üles