20 Comments
"Thanks for announcing that to everyone, Duolingo; greatly appreciated" said Adamo.
Adam, the son of Zamenhof, didn't contribute to the Esperanto movement. So, maybe it's a reference.
In the suggested translation "Adam himself built nothing." in English this can have both the nuance of "Adam built absolutely nothing, with or without help from others." OR "Adam may have built something, but if he did it was not by himself." Which nuance is being portrayed here in Esperanto????
100
Both. As in most languages, esperanto isnt made to be structurally unambigous. For that you can read about lojban.
- 1269
To me "Adam himself built nothing" is not ambiguous. It very clearly means that he didn't actually build anything. He may have had things named after him - or may have commissioned some buildings which other people built, but he didn't build them.
If we want to say that he had help, we're more likely to say "he didn't build it by himself."
Mem is generally an emphatic particle - sort of a verbal underlining. Yes, it does have the secondary meaning "by oneself without help from others" - but it's usually clear from the context. I wouldn't understand this sentence this way. If I wanted to express the idea that Adam did build things but not by himself, I would say something like:
- Adamo konstruis nenion sola.
- Adamo konstruis nenion sen helpo.
The sentence that made the most sense to me (and was accepted) was: "Adam built nothing by himself"
In english this sentence has nothing to do with other people. Whether other people were involved or not, Adamo did no construction with his own hands. "Himself" and "by himself" are different.
- 1269
I replied to your comment which is a comment on the OP. I assumed from that fact that you were commenting on the OP. Did you have a question I could answer for you?
FFS, the mobile version does not work like the web version. Read, don't stalk. And that is the only question you can help me with, can you stop stalking me?
- 1269
Have you stopped beating your wife?
Edit: In case the subtlety was lost here, I was saying that there's no sense in answering a question which makes a false presupposition.
I wrote 'Adam built himself nothing' and it was marked as correct, but from reading the thread, I am wondering if it should have been marked wrong, because my answer meant 'Adam might have built things for other people, but nothing for himself'
- 1269
My take is that it's not correct. "He built himself nothing" means "he built nothing for himself" which is different.
I wrote "Adamo himself hasn't built a thing" to avoid a double negative and that was marked wrong. I don't get it.
- 1269
It's a slightly free translation... not the first thing that would have come to mind. "He has built nothing" is not a double negative. If it happens again, you could report it... or you could answer more literally next ime.
