1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: Esperanto
  4. >
  5. "The rose is pink."

"The rose is pink."

Translation:La rozo estas rozkolora.

September 5, 2015



I accidentally put rozas instead of rozkoloras and it was marked right. Is omitting -kolor- allowed for other colours as well?


It is done by some, others don't do it. If it will be ambiguous in a sentence I advise you to keep -kolor- if not you might use only the roza, oranĝa etc.

Just came to think about it, when you say "rozas" it can only mean "to be pink" though, as if you make nouns to verbs it won't mean "is a flower" "is a house" etc. because it will be the verb form:

You can say:

La afero estas ruĝa = La afero ruĝas

but you can't say the last example here:

La afero estas domo = La afero domas

Because nouns being made to verbs change meaning or have no meaning at all:

"Mi dancas" doesn't mean I am a dance it means I am dancing, I hope you see where I'm going with this?

Thus "La afero rozas" can't mean the object is a rose it has to mean the object is pink because only adjectives can be turned to verbs and retain their meaning as if they were used with "estas".


Dankon! Yeah I see what you mean. Have a lingot!


Well I have thought about it as well, I see not every noun can turn into a verb, but how about adjectives? roza is an adjective, therefore there's a verb for it?


Roza is an adjective derived from the noun rozo, it is the stem which decides.


I think my question was a bit ambiguous, sorry. If a stem has an adjective and it can come after estas, can it always be made to a verb?


I found an answer myself. The answer is yes, and you will learn that further down the tree.


I still can't get over the fact that rose and pink seem to be the same colors in Esperanto. It's confusing.


As a Russian speaker, I have problems with imaging a difference between rose and pink colors — in Russian, pink color is named after a rose :)


Translate this text
The rose is pink.

La rozo estas rozokolora. ← You have a typo in your answer.

Almost correct!
La rozo estas rozkolora.

Wiktionary means that rozkolora is an alternative form of rozokolora.
Is rozokolora a "less used, almost obsolete" form, or ought it be added as a correct answer?


Are there many other colors like rozkora where the name implies that something is the same colour as a particular object (e.g., rozkolora looks like it means "rose coloured").


The ones I (a fellow komencanto) know of are the three introduced in the third lesson of the "Colors" skill: rozkolora/rozokolora, oranĝkolora, violkolora.

Then again, according to the Esperanto Wikipedia-page on koloro, it seems to be fine to use just roza, oranĝa, viola (with, I guess, the restriction of only using the shorter variants in situations where it's clear that they are colours (as opposed to being adjectivised forms of the objects)).


Personally, now that "roza" had been given as an option, I'll never use the elongated version.


Roses are red, Violets are blue, But Esperanto roses are pink.


In Italian the word for rose is 'rosa' which also means 'pink'. Roses are first of all pink, here.


And violets are purple :) not blue... In Italy we would say 'Le viole sono viola' because the flower and the colour have the same name. Same as in Esperanto

Learn Esperanto in just 5 minutes a day. For free.