info
Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
NEREFORMA NEPROPONO.
69 views
Skip to first unread message
Nikolao Mihajlenko
Sep 26, 2014, 8:15:41 PM9/26/14
to
kiu homo? -> ku? Angle: WHO? Ruse: КТО?
kiun homon? -> kuen?
kiuj homoj? -> kuj?
kiujn homojn? -> kuejn
---
http://mihajlenko.anihost.ru
kiun homon? -> kuen?
kiuj homoj? -> kuj?
kiujn homojn? -> kuejn
---
http://mihajlenko.anihost.ru
Elhana
Sep 26, 2014, 8:23:11 PM9/26/14
to
Nikolao Mihajlenko:
> kiu homo? -> ku? Angle: WHO? Ruse: КТО?
Kolya, you've forgot to take your medicines.
> kiu homo? -> ku? Angle: WHO? Ruse: КТО?
Nikolao Mihajlenko
Sep 29, 2014, 3:49:50 AM9/29/14
to
суббота, 27 сентября 2014 г., 4:15:41 UTC+4 пользователь Nikolao Mihajlenko написал:
pro
por
per
pri
Toro multe P kaj R.
por -> fo (angle FOR)
pri -> bo (angle ABOUT, ruse O)
Kaj ni ricevus:
pro
fo
per
bo
Kiel bele ustus!
>
>
> http://mihajlenko.anihost.ru
> kiu homo? -> ku? Angle: WHO? Ruse: КТО?
>
> kiun homon? -> kuen?
>
> kiuj homoj? -> kuj?
>
> kiujn homojn? -> kuejn
>
> ---
>
Ni havas en Esperanto:
>
> kiun homon? -> kuen?
>
> kiuj homoj? -> kuj?
>
> kiujn homojn? -> kuejn
>
> ---
>
pro
por
per
pri
Toro multe P kaj R.
por -> fo (angle FOR)
pri -> bo (angle ABOUT, ruse O)
Kaj ni ricevus:
pro
fo
per
bo
Kiel bele ustus!
>
>
> http://mihajlenko.anihost.ru
Dario el Tigulio
Sep 29, 2014, 5:41:46 AM9/29/14
to
Nikolao Mihajlenko skribis:
> Toro multe P kaj R.
?!
> por -> fo (angle FOR)
> pri -> bo (angle ABOUT, ruse O)
>
> Kaj ni ricevus:
> pro
> fo
> per
> bo
>
> Kiel bele ustus!
tute ne.
> Toro multe P kaj R.
> por -> fo (angle FOR)
> pri -> bo (angle ABOUT, ruse O)
>
> Kaj ni ricevus:
> pro
> fo
> per
> bo
>
> Kiel bele ustus!
LeviPetro
Sep 29, 2014, 7:55:45 AM9/29/14
to
29 septembro 2014 09:49:50 UTC+2, Nikolao Mihajlenko :
> суббота, 27 сентября 2014 г., 4:15:41 UTC+4 пользователь Nikolao Mihajlenko написал:
> Toro multe P kaj R.
¡Olé!Elhana
Sep 29, 2014, 2:49:19 PM9/29/14
to
Dario el Tigulio:
> ?!
Esperanto has too many words which are almost the same, like these ones. Do you expect people to remember them?
Have you heard about some _real_ language where personal pronouns need to be replaced with alternative ones for telephone and radio?
Everything has to adopt or die. We know what Esperanto chose.
> ?!
Esperanto has too many words which are almost the same, like these ones. Do you expect people to remember them?
Have you heard about some _real_ language where personal pronouns need to be replaced with alternative ones for telephone and radio?
Everything has to adopt or die. We know what Esperanto chose.
Dario el Tigulio
Sep 29, 2014, 5:22:09 PM9/29/14
to
Elhana skribis:
> Dario el Tigulio:
>> ?!
>
> Esperanto has too many words which are almost the same, like these ones. Do you expect people to remember them?
kompreneble jes
> real_ language where personal pronouns need to be replaced with alternative ones for telephone and radio?
>
> Everything has to adopt or die. We know what Esperanto chose.
mi bedaŭras sed mi ne komprenas ĉi tiujn lastajn frazojn
> Dario el Tigulio:
>> ?!
>
> Esperanto has too many words which are almost the same, like these ones. Do you expect people to remember them?
> real_ language where personal pronouns need to be replaced with alternative ones for telephone and radio?
>
> Everything has to adopt or die. We know what Esperanto chose.
Cleve Lendon
Sep 29, 2014, 7:40:09 PM9/29/14
to
On Tuesday, September 30, 2014 3:49:19 AM UTC+9, Elhana Banana wrote:
>
> Esperanto has too many words which are almost the same...
It seems that English has also chosen to die. :-p
Klivo
>
> Esperanto has too many words which are almost the same...
>
> Everything has to adopt or die. We know what Esperanto chose.
No doubt you meant 'adapt'.
> Everything has to adopt or die. We know what Esperanto chose.
It seems that English has also chosen to die. :-p
Klivo
LeviPetro
Sep 30, 2014, 3:36:45 AM9/30/14
to
Le mardi 30 septembre 2014 01:40:09 UTC+2, Cleve Lendon a écrit :
> On Tuesday, September 30, 2014 3:49:19 AM UTC+9, Elhana Banana wrote:
> > Esperanto has too many words which are almost the same...
Hm... to too two, write rite right ... adapt adept adopt ... die die dye ...
> On Tuesday, September 30, 2014 3:49:19 AM UTC+9, Elhana Banana wrote:
> > Esperanto has too many words which are almost the same...
your you're ... which witch ...
> > Everything has to adopt or die. We know what Esperanto chose.
> No doubt you meant 'adapt'.
is a likely interpretation.
> It seems that English has also chosen to die. :-p
> Klivo
Petro.
AV3
Sep 30, 2014, 11:00:06 AM9/30/14
to
On 9/30/14, 3:36, LeviPetro wrote:
> Le mardi 30 septembre 2014 01:40:09 UTC+2, Cleve Lendon a écrit :
>> On Tuesday, September 30, 2014 3:49:19 AM UTC+9, Elhana Banana wrote:
>
>>> Esperanto has too many words which are almost the same...
>
> Hm... to too two, write rite right ... adapt adept adopt ... die die dye ....
> Le mardi 30 septembre 2014 01:40:09 UTC+2, Cleve Lendon a écrit :
>> On Tuesday, September 30, 2014 3:49:19 AM UTC+9, Elhana Banana wrote:
>
>>> Esperanto has too many words which are almost the same...
>
> your you're ... which witch ...
>
>>> Everything has to adopt or die. We know what Esperanto chose.
>
>> No doubt you meant 'adapt'.
>
> Maybe so, but he could have meant 'adopt'. So, 'adapt'
> is a likely interpretation.
Li preferas ignori dusignifecon por ke li povu anonci, ke la angla estas
>
>>> Everything has to adopt or die. We know what Esperanto chose.
>
>> No doubt you meant 'adapt'.
>
> Maybe so, but he could have meant 'adopt'. So, 'adapt'
> is a likely interpretation.
simpla. Tamen, nur ignorado estas simpla, la angla estas por li tro
malfacila. Ne gravas, kiun signifon li intencis, ĉar li ne kapablas
elekti inter la du. Kaj tiu ĉi mesaĝogrupo ne estas loko por instrui al
li la anglan per diskuto de liaj eraroj.
>
>>...
--
++====+=====+=====+=====+=====+====+====+=====+=====+=====+=====+====++
||Arnold VICTOR, New York City, i. e., <arvi...@Wearthlink.net> ||
||Arnoldo VIKTORO, Nov-jorkurbo, t. e., <arvi...@Wearthlink.net> ||
||Remove capital letters from e-mail address for correct address/ ||
|| Forigu majusklajn literojn el e-poŝta adreso por ĝusta adreso ||
++====+=====+=====+=====+=====+====+====+=====+=====+=====+=====+====++
Elhana
Sep 30, 2014, 4:48:32 PM9/30/14
to
AV3:
> Li preferas ignori dusignifecon por ke li povu anonci, ke la angla estas
> simpla.
If English is 'not simple', which language is 'simpler' than?
It's just your envy speaking: how dared the dirty peasants to create a tool more efficient and beautiful than all the 127 years' results of pushing by sophisticated, cultivated pederasts? English is the real, living, popular Esperanto.
> Li preferas ignori dusignifecon por ke li povu anonci, ke la angla estas
> simpla.
It's just your envy speaking: how dared the dirty peasants to create a tool more efficient and beautiful than all the 127 years' results of pushing by sophisticated, cultivated pederasts? English is the real, living, popular Esperanto.
Elhana
Sep 30, 2014, 5:00:40 PM9/30/14
to
LeviPetro:
> to too two, write rite right ... adapt adept adopt [lol whut?] ... die die dye ...
One is a result of natural convergence in the living language, and the other is nothing more than a sloppy planning. Natural is good. Artificial is bad.
> adapt adept adopt
That is funny that you chose these words, as their root vowels are the same a, e, and o that in Esperanto itself. If you deem the English not clear, Esperanto is not clear either.
> to too two, write rite right ... adapt adept adopt [lol whut?] ... die die dye ...
One is a result of natural convergence in the living language, and the other is nothing more than a sloppy planning. Natural is good. Artificial is bad.
> adapt adept adopt
That is funny that you chose these words, as their root vowels are the same a, e, and o that in Esperanto itself. If you deem the English not clear, Esperanto is not clear either.
LeviPetro
Sep 30, 2014, 6:15:51 PM9/30/14
to
is Esperanto.
LeviPetro
Sep 30, 2014, 6:33:15 PM9/30/14
to
Le mardi 30 septembre 2014 23:00:40 UTC+2, Elhana a écrit :
> LeviPetro:
>
> > to too two, write rite right ... adapt adept adopt [lol whut?] ... die die dye ...
>
>
>
> One is a result of natural convergence in the living language, and the other is nothing more than a sloppy planning. Natural is good. Artificial is bad.
"Natural is good. Artficial is bad." That is said by a fan of computing. :-)
> LeviPetro:
>
> > to too two, write rite right ... adapt adept adopt [lol whut?] ... die die dye ...
>
>
>
> One is a result of natural convergence in the living language, and the other is nothing more than a sloppy planning. Natural is good. Artificial is bad.
> > adapt adept adopt
> That is funny that you chose these words, as their root vowels are the same a, e, and o that in Esperanto itself. If you deem the English not clear, Esperanto is not clear either.
twisted reasoning.
Cleve Lendon
Oct 1, 2014, 11:43:54 AM10/1/14
to
On Wednesday, October 1, 2014 5:48:32 AM UTC+9, Elhana wrote:
>...sophisticated, cultivated pederasts...
Ĉu li estis bela? Ĉu vi amis lin? Kiel li perfidis vin?
Klivo
>...sophisticated, cultivated pederasts...
Ĉu li estis bela? Ĉu vi amis lin? Kiel li perfidis vin?
Klivo
LeviPetro
Oct 2, 2014, 4:27:09 AM10/2/14
to
Merkrede 1 oktobro 2014 17:43:54 UTC+2, Cleve Lendon :
> Ĉu li estis bela? Ĉu vi amis lin? Kiel li perfidis vin?
> Klivo
Ili estis pli ol unu!
Petro.
> On Wednesday, October 1, 2014 5:48:32 AM UTC+9, Elhana wrote:
> >...sophisticated, cultivated pederastS...
> Ĉu li estis bela? Ĉu vi amis lin? Kiel li perfidis vin?
> Klivo
Petro.
0 new messages