글: 55
언어: English
Miland (프로필 보기) 2011년 6월 24일 오후 3:59:13
Mevido:La vorton "liva" ne konas mi! De kie venas ĝi, mi petas?I'll translate this one for you. Mi traduku ĉi tiun por vi:
(I'm sorry, I don't speak english very well.)
"I'm not acquainted with the word "liva"! May I ask where it comes from?"
My answer is: I don't know - but it doesn't matter to me. Mi ne scias - tamen ne gravas al mi.
Anyway, PMEG ("Alternativoj al MAL-vortoj") has a list of words that avoid the prefix.
Ĉiukaze, PMEG ("Alternativoj al MAL-vortoj") havas liston de vortoj, kiuj evitas la prefikson.
razlem (프로필 보기) 2011년 6월 24일 오후 6:34:08
kaha:More linguistically, a lot of language have 2 words for 1 concept. As in English: liberty and freedom. fraternity and brotherhood...That's more to do with the history of English than active word construction. Both 'liberty' and 'fraternity' are Latin words reminiscent of French in England, while 'freedom' and 'brotherhood' are Germanic remnants.
But I find the opposite to be true. I've seen that many languages have multiple meanings for one word. Chinese and Maori come to mind.
geo63 (프로필 보기) 2011년 6월 24일 오후 7:31:50
razlem:...I've seen that many languages have multiple meanings for one word. Chinese and Maori come to mind.Why so far away to look for. English verbs have multiple meanings.
henma (프로필 보기) 2011년 6월 24일 오후 8:06:14
erinja:I think you meant to say "liva", ceigered, not "leva" (levi = to lift or raise)(Sorry, my mistake... I was the first to use the wrong word, but I edited the message already)
kaha:More linguistically, a lot of language have 2 words for 1 concept. As in English: liberty and freedom. fraternity and brotherhood....True, and that can be complex for people who studies the language... For you, or for me, liberty and fraternity are easy, as we have similar words, but I think freedom and brotherhood are easier to understand for somebody who doesn't speak a romance language and had already learned free, brother, and the suffixes -dom and -hood.
In Spanish we can have even more than four synonyms for some words, but that makes the language difficult even for ourselves. In our case, this happens because of the extension that the empire Spain had, in times when communication was slow and difficult... there are different names for the same thing is different parts of the globe.
When I lived in Spain, I had to learn several words (not for things new to me, but things I knew with other name)... I also heard words I knew, but I had never used (I had learned them reading books... I thought some of those were archaic, but they weren't, they were used everyday in Spain
).It's good to have some synonyms... but I prefer to keep them to a minimum, and much better if they don't involve too many new roots (there are cases in which too derivations, from different roots overlap in a common meaning
)Amike,
Daniel.
sudanglo (프로필 보기) 2011년 6월 25일 오전 10:43:29
But with all due deference to your erudition, are you quite sure that the two terms occupy the same space in the language.
I'd judge that it is pretty rare in English which abounds in near synonyms that such words are used in exactly the same way. I would expect this phenomenon to be paralleled in Esperanto.
Anyway, returning to Polaris's point, it seems to me that one argument for a richness of root-stock in Esperanto is connected with status.
In quite a few countries a knowledge of English has a certain prestige value (snob value). It certainly wouldn't be a bad thing for a certain 'glamour' to be attached to a knowledge of Esperanto.
To a certain extent the intensive use of long compound words and the subsuming of distinctions under a single term can make Esperanto seem somewhat childish.
On the other hand subtlety and differentiation and refined expression are more associated with sophistication.
By the way, freedom and liberty are not exactly equivalents. You can accuse someone of taking liberties, but 'What a freedom' is a very bizarre way of saying 'What a liberty'.
bertilow (프로필 보기) 2011년 6월 25일 오후 1:03:13
sudanglo:Very interesting Bertilow, about the history of 'hospitalo', and it being an older coinage than 'malsanulejo'.Pretty sure, but that sureness is essentially just based on my personal impression of actual usage.
But with all due deference to your erudition, are you quite sure that the two terms occupy the same space in the language.
sudanglo:I'd judge that it is pretty rare in English which abounds in near synonyms that such words are used in exactly the same way. I would expect this phenomenon to be paralleled in Esperanto.It would not be surprising if a distinction did evolve, but as it seems, in this case it hasn't happened. It's interesting that some lexicographers have wanted it to happen so much that they went ahead and invented distinctions (at least that's my impression). And it's even more interesting that - as far as I can tell - no one actually follows their suggestions in practice (as opposed to theoretical discussions).
But I could be wrong, of course (it happens all the time...). Can someone find an actual text where both words are used (ideally with different meanings)? In my experience everybody uses either "hospitalo" or "malsanulejo" (although everyone knows both words).
sudanglo (프로필 보기) 2011년 6월 25일 오후 1:58:29
I wonder if that, in general, it is a natural reaction across all cultures to feel that if the names are different then there should be a difference.
If we are talking about a field hospital - some tent set aside for treating wounded in a military conflict - I think I would prefer hospitalo to malsanulejo.
Again if one were talking about the characteristic smell in hospitals, I think I would prefer hospitala odoro to malsanuleja odoro.
Perhaps this is fanciful though.
henma (프로필 보기) 2011년 6월 25일 오후 3:15:52
sudanglo:If we are talking about a field hospital - some tent set aside for treating wounded in a military conflict - I think I would prefer hospitalo to malsanulejo.As far as I know, somebody wounded in a military conflict is not 'sana', so (s)he is a 'malsanulo'... I think such a field hospital is also a 'malsanulejo'.
But you can call this field hospital an 'ambulanco' if you really want to make a distinction.
Amike,
Daniel.
bertilow (프로필 보기) 2011년 6월 25일 오후 3:29:29
sudanglo:I wonder if that, in general, it is a natural reaction across all cultures to feel that if the names are different then there should be a difference.It probably is a very natural, or at least very common, reaction.
Perhaps, if we wouldn't have had the "great battle of the neologisms" - with the overshadowing idea that it has to be either "hospitalo" or "malsanulejo", not both - then such a distinction would have had a chance to evolve.
sudanglo:If we are talking about a field hospital - some tent set aside for treating wounded in a military conflict - I think I would prefer hospitalo to malsanulejo.It's interesting that English just adds "field" in front of the basic word "hospital". A simple and very adequate solution, I think.