Print

Print


Je 03:18 ptm 5/2/98 +0100, James CHANDLER skribis:
 
>On Fri, 1 May 1998, Julian Pardoe wrote:
>
>> > In Ido it is possible to say PAGENDESAS, which to me is more logical
>> > than PAGENDAS
>>
>> Does BELA become BELAS or BELESAS in Ido?  PAGENDA must follow the same
>> rule.  In Eo BELA becomes BELAS and PAGENDA follows the same "rule".
>
>To
>the western mind, at least, expressions like "it blues", "she beautifuls"
>are entirely strange and pretty incomprehensible.
 
>These copula-less Esp phrases are
>really as bad...
>
>A further (bad) [Ido] rule is...
>
Ni hao, James?
 
(1) There ain't no such thing as "the western mind". That's as big a
fallacy as "the inscrutable oriental" or "the humorless Englishman". Those
who think they are stuck with "the western mind" actually have minds as
flexible as any other kind.
 
(2) Copula-less sentences sentences of the form "subject" + "predicate
attribute" are far from uncommon in the world, even among IE languages;
witness Russian. Ya amerikanskij; vi angliskij. I really have to mention
Chinese with its stative verbs (with which D. K. Jordan identifies
Esperanto terms such as "pagendas").
 
(3) Every language, including Esperanto and Ido, has its own ways of doing
things. They they may be considered "bad" only if they don't work. If they
don't work, they disappear pretty quickly in any case (at least from those
languages which are actually used; and Ido went through such a period, so I
would guess that a majority of its rules and practices have been tested and
actually work, including the omitted -AT). Those that do work are not "bad"
(though for some purposes they may be "unfortunate", e.g. English irregular
verbs).
 
(4) Every time you learn a foreign language, you have to learn new ways of
doing things. When you discover that Spanish has two different verbs
(actually three, if you count the expressions for "there is", "there are")
for "to be", or that almost every European language has two different verbs
for "to know", you don't satisfy yourself with saying "that's bad!" -- you
figure out why and learn how to use them. Turns out the distinction can, at
times, be pretty useful.
 
(5) With reference to "estas bela" vs "belas", they are _not_ simply two
different ways of saying the same thing, though they can be used as such
for somebody who simply wants to translate "is beautiful" into Esperanto. I
think I pointed out the distinction before. In Esperanto's own terms, it is
significant. In English's terms, it isn't (except in a few cases -- e.g.
"vi estas prava" =3D you are correct, "vi pravas" =3D you've got it!; or "=
=FEi
estas bela" =3D she's beautiful... vs. "=FEi belas" =3D she's beautiful
(sigh!)...) -- but then I thought we were all agreed on the point that a
conIAL shouldn't just be English with funny words.
 
 
-- Don HARLOW
http://www.webcom.com/~donh/
(English version: http://www.webcom.com/~donh/dona.html)