erinja:I couldn't find the citation I was thinking of in "Lingvo kaj Vivo"; maybe I just imagined it. But I did find a citation for some very weird grammar that Zamenhof used, that is not advisable today: "Tre grava por la progreso de l' lingvo internacia estas diligenta uzado ĝin en korespondado"

I would never recommend such a use, but Zamenhof commonly used forms like that throughout his life.

That's fascinating. Zamenhof's form made instant sense to me. Why is this use deprecated? Is it because it makes a noun function as a verb?

erinja:Yes, I learned it the same way. Although one could argue that "the speaking me" still, at its base, conveys the same meaning as "me speaking".

I think it's a matter of what you expected to see. If you somehow planned to see me speaking, then it's "parolantan". If you saw me, and only later you found out that I was speaking, it's "parolanta". I agree though that in this particular example the difference is very subtle.

richardhall:

erinja: "Tre grava por la progreso de l' lingvo internacia estas diligenta uzado ĝin en korespondado"

That's fascinating. Zamenhof's form made instant sense to me. Why is this use deprecated? Is it because it makes a noun function as a verb?

I think so, but an adverb can take an object ("uzante ĝin") and no one really seems to complain about that. I think it's custom more than anything else - we don't use it because we simply don't, because the bulk of Esperanto literature doesn't use it, and it isn't a form that really made it through to modern grammar. We simply don't normally assign objects to nouns, even though it isn't wrong to do so.

For a use like this, normally we would use "de" rather than the -n ending; most people would say "uzado de ĝi".

But even though it's correct, I wouldn't say "uzado ĝin". It's correct but it sounds wrong to my ear and I prefer to word my sentences in another way.

erinja:I think so, but an adverb can take an object ("uzante ĝin") and no one really seems to complain about that.

That's an adverbial participle, and of course I find it natural too, but would you say "uze ĝin"?

Yesterday one of my students asked me how to translate a certain saying (a proposito) and I checked the dictionary to be sure. It said "rilate tion", "koncerne tion". I was puzzled at first because I am not used at all to see direct objects right after adverbs. It makes sense, of course, but still...

mnlg:That's an adverbial participle, and of course I find it natural too, but would you say "uze ĝin"?

No, I wouldn't. It's correct though, obviously.

Yesterday one of my students asked me how to translate a certain saying (a proposito) and I checked the dictionary to be sure. It said "rilate tion", "koncerne tion". I was puzzled at first because I am not used at all to see direct objects right after adverbs. It makes sense, of course, but still...

I hear forms like that from time to time. I am personally more likely to say "rilate al tio". I might use "koncerne tion", simply because I don't like the sound of koncerne + al so I wouldn't use that either.

erinja:

mnlg:would you say "uze ĝin"?

No, I wouldn't. It's correct though, obviously.

So you see, people *do* complain about object following adverbs, at least after a fashion

("rilate tion", "koncerne tion")
I might use "koncerne tion", simply because I don't like the sound of koncerne + al so I wouldn't use that either.

I didn't really mean to make it a matter of personal preference (I have no problem with that), more like a consideration on the existence of such forms... I tried to summon any other occurrence of adverb + object but I couldn't recall any.