It's gramatically correct, but I'd prefer "ekforiri".

Anyway, the action described by "foriri" is brief enough to make both -iĝ- and ek- superfluous, in my opinion.

Regards,

Daniel

Chainy:

erinja:
foririĝi = to initiate the 'going away' action [maybe I'd say "to up and leave" in colloquial English]

Can't say I've come across this one before. Sounds like a complicated way of saying 'foriri'. I'm having a hard time trying to work out why it should help by adding 'iĝi'?! In fact, does it even make any sense?

I had a quick look for this in Kukolo and found a mere 4 examples, all of which seem to come from the same text.

erinja:

Chainy:In fact, I can't seem to find any examples of such words actually being used, anywhere! Certainly not with 'iri'. (Can anyone find any examples?!)

Eliriĝis is in the tekstaro, from Robinson Crusoe.

"Kiu ajn en osto ennaskiĝis, ne el karno eliriĝis."

It's worth also mentioning that this is apparently the ONLY such example in the Tekstaro. And Kukolo doesn't bring up much more, either.

Initially Google says there are 93 results for 'eliriĝis', but when you click through the pages they stop at page 4 and Google states that there are in fact only 33 results, many of which come from this very sentence in Robinson Crusoe.

This case of adding '-iĝ-' seems to be theoretically possible, but used very rarely. Regarding the Robinson Crusoe sentence, it seems the author used the theoretical possibility merely to make it rhyme with 'ennaskiĝis'.

Chainy:It's worth also mentioning that this is apparently the ONLY such example in the Tekstaro. And Kukolo doesn't bring up much more, either.

Actually there are quite a few in Tekstaro. Besides sidiĝi which gets lots of hits, you can run this query and you'll get others:

(bol|brul|ĉes|daŭr|deleg|dron|eksplod|grimp|halt|kresk|krev|odor|
pend|star|ŝpruc|ŝrump|ŝvel|velk)iĝ\\VF\\b

tommjames:[bol|brul|etc etc|velk)iĝ\VF\b/quote]Is there any webpage that teaches this "tekstaro programming language", or a key to the main symbols somewhere?

Miland:

tommjames:[bol|brul|etc etc|velk)iĝVFb/quote]Is there any webpage that teaches this "tekstaro programming language", or a key to the main symbols somewhere?

Yep there's a help page here. Go down to "Specialaj serĉosimboloj".

Additionally there are many Regular Expression guides on the internet, for learning the syntax more extensively. A good resource is http://www.regular-expressions.info/

Although in the case of komenci and fini the discussion in PMEG has examples with which one would not want to quibble, I feel that there is more to be said about these verbs.

Whilst I think I would always say la koncerto jam komenciĝis, with some other inanimate subjects (which might be viewed as agents) I find myself hesitating between the the bare form and the iĝ form.

It seems to me that it would not be wrong to say Rapidu, la filmo komencas as a short form of la filmo komencas ruliĝi.

And describing the opening chapters of a book, would you say la libro komencas per priskribo de la vivo de la heroo antaŭ la unua mondmilto, or would you use komenciĝi?

You would certainly say en la komenco Dio kreis la mondon, or vi trovos indekson je la fino de la libro, and not komenciĝo or finiĝo.

In English we distinguish between Let's get started and Let's start. The former implying a move towards starting and the latter that we should start.

To capture this nuance why can't we say Ni komenciĝu in contrast with Ni komencu. I can certainly say Ni ekkomencu (Ni iĝu komencaj).

With a transitive verb the meaning is not always passive in the iĝ form. It is quite common to hear Mi sciiĝis pri tio with the meaning Mi iĝis scianta (not sciata).

tommjames:

Chainy:It's worth also mentioning that this is apparently the ONLY such example in the Tekstaro. And Kukolo doesn't bring up much more, either.

Actually there are quite a few in Tekstaro. Besides sidiĝi which gets lots of hits, you can run this query and you'll get others:

(bol|brul|ĉes|daŭr|deleg|dron|eksplod|grimp|halt|kresk|krev|odor
|pend|star|ŝpruc|ŝrump|ŝvel|velk)iĝVFb

I was referring to the use of '-gx-' with the verb 'iri' in particular.

Of course this form is used with many verbs, it just doesn't seem to be so widely accepted that it should be used with any verb. With many verbs, I think most would stick with 'ek-'.

I'm not talking about theoretical possibility, more about how people have tended to actually use the words.

Ok, so some might say that they find 'foririgxis' a completely normal form, but to me it sounds a little odd if for no other reason than the fact that you don't come across it very often. At least, that seems to be the case if you do searches for it on the internet.

I don't know why there are so few examples of 'foririgxis', that's just the way it is. Maybe because 'ek-' is usually enough and more familiar to people.

sudanglo:

As a matter of simpla kunmetado "sciiĝi" isn't illogical, but outside of perfectly clear context I think it can be a bit tricky to understand. PMEG marks that verb as "duba", and I find myself agreeing. I don't think we should be extending that logic into other verbs like komenci. If we say that iĝ-transitives can equally well have active as well as mediopassive/middle voice meaning then you're just opening the language up to a whole lot of confusion. And if you're limiting it to komenci and fini, well that seems rather arbitrary.

I altered tommjames formula to look in the Tekstaro for the following:

(forir|elir|enir|alir|suprenir)iĝ\\VF\\b

Nothing came up apart from that one Robinson Crusoe example.

Chainy:(including the backslashes that won't appear here for some reason!)

You have to enter backslashes in twice; they seem to be some kind of special character in the Lernu forums.