Al contingut
Respondre

Couple PMEG questions

de EldanarLambetur, 3 de juliol de 2011

Missatges: 10

Llengua: English

EldanarLambetur (Mostra el perfil) 3 de juliol de 2011 9.55.49

So, I like to browse the PMEG, because it goes into such detail, answering almost all of my questions. My Esperanto is only just at the level of understanding it though, and there are a couple things that turn up in it that I think I know what they mean, but don't understand why they're like that... So I wondered if I could get an explanation please!

Firstly, the verb "temi" is used a lot. Which according to dictionaries means "to be about" (subject-wise). However, most of the time it occurs I see it with "pri":

1. Temas pri politiko

This looks like it's saying that "it's about politics". But with an extra "about", so I would have just said "temas politikon", would I be wrong? Why?

Secondly, I just read this phrase:

2. Perverba priskribo montras, pere de la ĉefverbo, priskribon de la subjekto...

Can you not say "per la ĉefverbo"? Is this just an alternative or does it mean something different?

Thanks!

geo63 (Mostra el perfil) 3 de juliol de 2011 10.23.42

EldanarLambetur:
1. Temas pri politiko
2. Perverba priskribo montras, pere de la ĉefverbo, priskribon de la subjekto...
You have to start thinking in esperanto, not projecting your own language onto it.

1. temi comes from the root tem-, that means a topic. So temi means -> to be a topic. So this "pri" is necessary to specify this topic - what it is about.

On the other hand the accusative can replace prepositions when it is not ambiguous. So you can write both:

temas pri politiko
temas politikon

2. Ask sudanglo, he can explain it better to you than me with my broken English. (pere = by the means of)

ceigered (Mostra el perfil) 3 de juliol de 2011 11.44.31

Geo's basically said it, but a big problem is that occaisionally dictionaries or various people speaking about things like to put the definition of the word in context, so they'll say something like "temas = to be about", but this isn't actually the definition as Geo said (in fact, I tend to get a little annoyed whenever someone says "you learn language by learning the context" because then the context confuses me. Seems like a very inefficient and dangerous way to learn languages).

Anyway, so:

Tio temas pri la milito en Libio.
= That's about the war in Libya, but more correctly is
"That is a/the topic about the war in Libya."

(One way to think about it is "That topics about the war in Libya", but "topics" doesn't exist in English, we simply say "That is about ...". In Esperanto there's a preference to be more precise while keeping things relatively short, which is why we simply say "temas" instead of "estas temo").

====

As for "pere de", I sort of get it, but don't. I'd normally say "per la ĉeferbo", and the meaning isn't that different.

That said, "fare de" exists (based off of "fari"), and "peri" exists too (to act as an agent), so "pere de" seems to be a logical extension of that system.

But I can't really work out the definition, because I don't understand what it's saying.

"The by-use-of-verb description shows, _____ the main verb, a description of the subject"?

So I can only assume that the ____ is meant to be "acting as an agent of", or "by means of" (the latter seems simpler as "per").

Miland (Mostra el perfil) 3 de juliol de 2011 12.43.34

That which follows per is the direct instrument for doing something. In PMEG (section "Ĉefverbo kaj frazroloj, 4th box) you have an example of per; the hammer is the direct instrument for hitting the stone.

That which follows pere de, on the other hand, is an helper or intermediary. According to Butler's Step by Step, para 663, pere de means per helpo de.

On the same page in PMEG above (section "Perverba priskribo"), we have verbs like "to be", "to become" or "to think", being used to indicate adjectives that describe a subject or object. They help the adjective to describe something. In my view one could apply per to these adjectives, as they are the direct means of describing something.

If I summarise the above in Esperanto, it will provide another example, and may also help to make the matter clearer:

Foje oni priskribas subjekton (aŭ foje objekton) per adjektivo, pere de verbo kiel "esti", fariĝi", ktp.

(Trans: "Sometimes we describe a subject (or sometimes an object) by means of an adjective, with the help of a verb like "to be", "to become", and so on.")

EldanarLambetur (Mostra el perfil) 3 de juliol de 2011 13.11.13

Thanks for the help!
You have to start thinking in esperanto, not projecting your own language onto it.
That's certainly my aim, which is why if I'm confused I won't just learn by rote what the particular dictionary I'm looking at translates it as, and instead get someone to explain usage, so I can be sure to use it as an Esperanto word in its own right. ridulo.gif
to be a topic
Temi makes far more sense like that instead of "to be about" if it should be thought of with "pri". Thanks!

And I think I understand "pere de" now thanks!

geo63 (Mostra el perfil) 3 de juliol de 2011 14.42.13

EldanarLambetur:
You have to start thinking in esperanto, not projecting your own language onto it.
That's certainly my aim, which is why if I'm confused I won't just learn by rote what the particular dictionary I'm looking at translates it as, and instead get someone to explain usage, so I can be sure to use it as an Esperanto word in its own right. ridulo.gif
The English meaning of an esperanto word is only a shadow, not the exact equivalent. English verbs use lot of these "about", "in", "off", "at"... That way one can get confused later on when he encounters the verb in a sentence. I speak three other foreign languages. What I do is always trying to think in the target language, listening to the melody of words, not trying to translate them into my own language. That way I am able to understand the meaning on the fly. The method works fine for me, it could work for you as well.
If you start having dreams in the language you learn, it means that your brain has adapted to it.

ceigered (Mostra el perfil) 4 de juliol de 2011 9.52.10

@ Miland,

so "pere de" is softer, or less direct, than "per", as if to say "well, this helped, but it wasn't the tool that was used to accomplish XYZ task"?

Miland (Mostra el perfil) 4 de juliol de 2011 16.09.15

ceigered:@ Miland,

so "pere de" is .. "well, this helped, but it wasn't the tool that was used .."?
Yes, though I would say that pere is stronger than "helped", in the sense that the peraĵo is not a luxury - if you don't have it, you will need to include its meaning in some other way, e.g. if you omit the verb in La juna vidvino fariĝis denove finanĉino, you will need the suffix iĝ with fianĉino.

sudanglo (Mostra el perfil) 5 de juliol de 2011 9.21.50

The distinction between 'per' and 'pere de' is certainly a subtle one.

I find it difficult to think of an example where 'per' would be wrong and 'pere de would be right.

My feeling is however that the accounts of 'pere de ' in terms of mediation, with the assistance, or agency of, are probably along the right lines to convey the difference.

I would probably say 'mi venis per la trajno' (not pere de), but perhaps 'mi aranĝis la veturon pere de amiko.

EldanarLambetur (Mostra el perfil) 6 de juliol de 2011 21.37.28

Thanks for all the help! ridulo.gif

Tornar a dalt