Language Question
от page4of3, 11 март 2011
Съобщения: 85
Език: English
T0dd (Покажи профила) 18 март 2011, 13:44:59
darkweasel:Signifi won't do at all, because reference and meaning aren't the same thing, and I need to be able to make that distinction.T0dd:La vorto "persono" ne signifas nur homojn.
This leaves me a bit puzzled about how to say something like "The word 'person' doesn't refer only to humans."
Celi is interesting. Using it to mean "refer to" is somewhat metaphorical, but that's not necessarily a problem.
Here's an English sentence that uses the contrast between reference and meaning:
"The expressions 'wife of Bill Clinton' and 'current U.S. Secretary of State' refer to the same person but do not have the same meaning."
Would celi do the job in the first clause?
Miland (Покажи профила) 18 март 2011, 14:19:38
"The word 'person' doesn't describe only humans." La vorto "persono" preskribas ne nur homojn.
"The expressions 'wife of Bill Clinton' and 'current U.S. Secretary of State' describe the same person but do not have the same meaning."
You might also use a non-specific aboutness or prieco, though that wouldn't be my choice:
"The word 'person' isn't about only humans." La vorto "persono" temas (estas) ne nur pri homoj.
"The expressions 'wife of Bill Clinton' and 'current U.S. Secretary of State' are about the same person but do not have the same meaning."
jefusan (Покажи профила) 18 март 2011, 14:23:14
T0dd (Покажи профила) 18 март 2011, 15:12:36
Miland:You might use "describe", priskribi:No good. Describing and referring are different. Individual nouns refer, but don't describe.
"Unicorn" and "centaur" refer to nothing at all, because there are no unicorns or centaurs, but they don't have the same meaning.
Celdiri seems an fortunate way to characterize what words do, since words don't say things; people say things with words.
I'm tempted to use indiki, but it's not really a good fit. Indiki is closer to montri. Almontri is possible, if it can be used impersonally. I'm not sure about that.
In English, we have a near-synonym: "denote" (words and expressions denote, but people don't). There's no cognate in Esperanto, however.
erinja (Покажи профила) 18 март 2011, 15:29:36
T0dd:Celi is interesting. Using it to mean "refer to" is somewhat metaphorical, but that's not necessarily a problem.Celi has a long history of metaphorical usage; in some cases it seems to be used where I'd say "intend" or "to mean" in English.
I didn't make up use of "celi" to talk about meaning something when you talk. Someone else used it when I was a beginner, I picked up on it, and I've been using it ever since. Stretching the meaning from "to mean" to "to refer to" may be a bit much of a stretch; but to refer to something in the sense of pointing to it and saying "this is what I mean, this is the one I am talking about", then I think celi is appropriate. For other uses of "to refer to", other verbs might be more appropriate. I mentally translate "celi" as "to mean" in the metaphorical sense.
This message turned out longer than I intended, because I did a text search. It looks like celi has been around in a metaphorical sense for a very long time, but only relatively recently (in the 90's, in texts at tekstaro.org) have there been usages in line with "to mean to say".
You can see the evolution:
...La diferenco inter la ordinara [n] kaj la parolsono [ŋ], kiun li celas per la esprimo ‘elparolas la sonon n naze’ (from "Lingvistikaj aspektoj de Esperanto", 1978)
From "La Respubliko" (1993), we find:
Kion vi celas diri per tio, Trasimaĥo? [actually that work has a ton of uses of "celi diri", in very similar context to what I quoted]
From "Mortula ŝipo" (1995):
Mi penas diri tion tiom diskrete kaj elegante kiom eblas, do nur ĝentile aludas, kion mi celas. Sed vi proleto simple elkrias tion.
This one, from Monato (sometime 1997-2003), is almost exactly what we are talking about, that is, using the word "celi" to indicate "mean to say", without including a version of "diri":
--“Kaj krome, estus tiel ... emociplene provi tiujn novajn ĝernojn ...”
--“Vi celas genojn, ĉu?
From "Ondo de Esperanto" (sometime 2001-2004):
Estas bedaŭrinde, ke la bonkvalite eldonita KD ne enhavas libreton kun la tekstoj de la kantoj, ĉar en tiaj kantoj gravas vortoj, kaj foje estas necese reveni al ĵusa verso por pli bone kompreni kion celas la aŭtoro.
T0dd (Покажи профила) 18 март 2011, 15:38:50
Homoj ne ĉiam celas tion, kion ili diras, kaj ne ĉiam diras tion, kion ili celas.
That's handy for "to mean" in that sense, and less cumbersome than voli diri.
But to say "Words don't always mean what they refer to", I feel that something else is needed.
Vortoj ne ĉiam signifas tion, kion ili almontras.
What do you think? Is that relatively clear?
erinja (Покажи профила) 18 март 2011, 15:56:58
T0dd:But to say "Words don't always mean what they refer to", I feel that something else is needed.That sentence is not even clear to me in English, I have to say. In my mind, something means what it refers to. It may seem to refer to one thing but really refers to something else. In that case I would paraphrase it, that it says one thing but means another.
Vortoj ne ĉiam signifas tion, kion ili almontras.
What do you think? Is that relatively clear?
I think you could use "aludi" in your translation of this sentence, though you hesitate to do it due to the English use of "allude". Reta Vortaro has example sentences; where not only people "aludi", but also things; one of the examples given is "la participa finaĵo «ot» aludas estontecon pli ĝuste ol deviĝecon"
This may also be a more modern usage, in the tekstaro, it didn't show up to refer to things alluding, rather than people, until "Lingvistikaj aspektoj de Esperanto", by Wells.
Chainy (Покажи профила) 18 март 2011, 16:01:52
I find the following sentence difficult to understand:
"Words don't always mean what they refer to" - do you mean that they 'don't only mean what they refer to'? If a word refers to something as understood in the context, then surely it must have this meaning? But, it could always be interpreted as having another meaning, too.
Anyway, I think 'rilati' is the verb you're looking for.
sudanglo (Покажи профила) 18 март 2011, 16:49:19
The expressions 'wife of Bill Clinton' and 'current U.S. Secretary of State' refer to the same person but do not have the same meaning
Yes Todd, I can remember thinking that I didn't know what the Esperanto equivalent was for 'refer', but in this case, I would translate as follows.
La esprimoj la edzino de Bill Clinton kaj la nuna Ŝtatseketario identigas la saman personon sed ne havas la saman signifon.
The English word 'refer' has several distinct meanings which the Wells dictionary illustrates, giving as translations aludi; resendi, direkti; (sin) turni; referenci; rilati.
For 'The word person doesn't refer only to humans', I would say La vorto persono ne estas limigita al homoj (jure ankaŭ kompanioj povas esti personoj).
Or, 'persono' ampleksas pli ol homojn.
Same kiel Erinja, mi trovas obskura la signifon de la aserto 'Words don't always mean what the refer to'.
Ĉu tio volas diri ke la signifo iu vorto ne samas al tio, kion povas identigi tiu vorto?
Edit: Ĉu ne vortoj estas signoj en Esperanto kaj ili signas ion. When we talk about a word or an expression as referring to something, ni priparolas la signan funkcion de vortoj.
sudanglo (Покажи профила) 18 март 2011, 16:57:37