Mesaĝoj: 96
Lingvo: English
Tempodivalse (Montri la profilon) 2015-aŭgusto-12 02:55:03
Yes and a business owner who runs a business not owned by the government is a PRIVATE business.Yes, that's roughly the definition of a "private business". I'm not sure how this is relevant to our conversation.
Before thee spews any bull about "it's the law" let me remind that slavery was also "the law" at one time...........as was murdering Jews, Gypsies and homosexuals (and with the latter, still IS the law in some places).Really! We're comparing Western (and U.S.) free-speech laws with slavery and the Holocaust? (I wondered how long it would take for Godwin's Law to be invoked - however indirectly ...)
orthohawk (Montri la profilon) 2015-aŭgusto-12 02:57:44
Tempodivalse:oh, quelle surprise!Yes and a business owner who runs a business not owned by the government is a PRIVATE business.Yes, that's roughly the definition of a "private business". I'm not sure how this is relevant to our conversation.
selective ignorance is just as despicable as selective hearing.
Tempodivalse (Montri la profilon) 2015-aŭgusto-12 03:03:56
oh, quelle surprise!I'm still not sure what you're alluding to.
selective ignorance is just as despicable as selective hearing.
vejktoro (Montri la profilon) 2015-aŭgusto-12 04:58:12
Polaris:1. Why would anybody be offended at being addressed by "ci" instead of "vi"? Is there some servile connotation here that I've missed? That just seems like an awfully petty thing to be offended aboutPetty for sure.
But I do understand. My native dialect has two distinct forms of the 2nd person pronoun: singular and plural and when I first discover Eo had the same, I thought I'd avail of it.
However.
I quickly learned that Z strongly (and wisely) cautioned against it because of the vast cultural differences in natural languages concerning the singular... Simply, it can be an insult in many languages and cultures (even subconsciously) and mean nothing in others. An English native may not give a hoot, but some country Frenchman might just want to punch you in the face. Z realized some things may not be so easily 'lost' in translation and that it would best to avoid the mess.
Because we learn this as Esperantists, most would wonder what was meant by being called "ci." We are advised not to use it because it could be misconstrued as a slight, so when used purposefully, one is left to wonder if they have been slighted.
vejktoro (Montri la profilon) 2015-aŭgusto-12 05:07:27
When I was first referred to as 'ci' in an Eo forum.. I DID take it the wrong way... what did I do to be "ci-ed?"
It is completely different than being "thee-ed" That causes no confusion.. I know what it means: just second person singular, even if the non-standard object-for-subject took a bit of getting used to.
Why is 'thee' fine and 'ci' a no no? Because English 'thee' DOES NOT carry the weight that Eo 'ci' carries.
Eo IS NOT En!
I cannot expect to move a linguistic idiosyncrasy from one language to another. I cannot use 'ci' and 'vi' in Esperanto as I use the singular and plural pronouns in my dialect.
To propose so is ridiculous. It's like a Finn expecting a Persian to give up with prepositions and use the Urgic suffixes instead.
Armand6 (Montri la profilon) 2015-aŭgusto-12 06:25:08
In the international context, calling a single person the same way as a group is simply absurd. If you are trying to argue that some person may take offence to a singular 2nd person pronoun, I can respond that other person take offence if they are referred in the 2nd person at all, as they consider the 3rd person as the only polite way to refer to strangers.
We need this pronoun one way or another, as you can see.
Vestitor (Montri la profilon) 2015-aŭgusto-12 10:08:47
This supposed 'need' doesn't seem to be there. In my almost 4 decades on earth I've never yet found myself in a situation where I or other people were confused by you being used for singular/plural. It's not 'absurd' at all. How many Russian Esperantists have you met who are up in arms about vi's dual role in Esperanto?
None I'm willing to wager.
Armand6 (Montri la profilon) 2015-aŭgusto-12 10:42:12
tommjames (Montri la profilon) 2015-aŭgusto-12 10:50:43
Vestitor:In my almost 4 decades on earth I've never yet found myself in a situation where I or other people were confused by you being used for singular/plural.It's happened to me a few times. Mostly when I'm on the phone to some company, if I say "you" the person on the other end thinks I mean him or her specifically, when what I really mean is the organisation collectively. As a result I've often felt it would be convenient to have a specifically plural 2nd person pronoun - then we could kiss goodbye to people pressing "yourselves" into questionable use, and resorting to the wretched "you guys" (*shudder*).
Armand6:Eminent Russian Esperantists like Pokrovsky widely used "ci" in their translations. That is all that one need to know about it.Clearly that is not all one needs to know about it because knowing only this you'd be temped to use it, when doing so is inadvisable for many reasons (all the ones mentioned so far in this thread).
Tempodivalse (Montri la profilon) 2015-aŭgusto-12 22:40:51
Armand6:Eminent Russian Esperantists like Pokrovsky widely used "ci" in their translations. That is all that one need to know about it.Elhana/Tangi, is that you? ...