Translation:My watch works, but not accurately.
Does the same distinction between precision and accuracy exist in Esperanto as exists in English?
Something that is precise makes very fine measurements. If you have a watch that measures time down to the millisecond, it is very precise, even if the time is wrong. One the other hand, you might have a watch that does not even have a minute hand, but which shows the hour accurately at all times. It is accurate, but not precise, while the earlier watch was precise, but not accurate. It is a bit like the distinction between being logical and being correct.
Preciza is about very detailed information and is also used with analogue measurement like clocks and scales. Akurata is about fulfilling promises, services, duties. It is often associated with human behaviour.
OK, so closely related, but a bit of a false friend. Thank you very much.
Yet, there is a word for accuracy: akurateco.
http://reta-vortaro.de/revo/ When you look up precise, you see two words "precize" and "akurata" with the number 2 for its second meaning.
So does this sentence means the watch sorta works, like it functioklns but not well? Or does it mean that the watch works but is not accurate?
Isn't a watch that works, but is not accurate by definition one that works, but does not work well?
I am not sure I think one that does not work well may also be one that has functions that it should do but doesn't as it should ( such as like a stopwatch or timer), instead of one precise thing that it doesn't do like keep time well