I belive it means that good fathers have to work hell a lot, because after work they have to care for their children, so their day becomes longer than if they could relax or sleep after work.
Hahah i don't get the meaning either... Maybe it is just an exercise for you to learn vocab. But If you wanna think about it , maybe it can mean: if you are a good father you will enjoy better your days with your kids... you will always find time to take care of them no matter how tire you arrive home ... you will live longer and happier... that you be my guess :D
In order to be a good father, one must work hard and devote much time to one's offspring, making days seem longer.
Ending plurals with a j sounds much cooler than with an s!
But the j sound is much easier to miss when the speech is not clear. The s sound is much clearer, so plurals are easier to hear in English.
I wrote "Good fathers are having long days." and was marked wrong. Was I wrong or does the question need to be fixed?
My advice is that if you're ever marked wrong for responding "they are X-ing" instead of "They X", you should report it as a problem so it can be added as an alternative. That said, my sense as a native speaker is that "good fathers are having long days" is a fairly unlikely sentence compared to "good fathers have long days."
So "good parents" really doesn't work? Esperanto needs a bit of this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender_reform_in_Esperanto
Parent = gepatro.
Stick to how the language is, a living language cannot be reformed on a mere whim.
"A mere whim"? Really? I get your point, but I'd suggest the same thing if this were a natural language. We have the word "Ms." because the forced "Miss"/"Mrs." distinction was (rightly) considered sexist. There are many examples of gender-specific terms being replaced by gender-neutral terms in English. The idea of a constructed language being more resistant to reform than a natural language is pretty silly, in my opinion.
I have never said Esperanto being a constructed language is more resistant to reform than a natural language. Though I am sure you understand that adding another form of formal greeting which was done in English cannot be compared to changing the meaning of a word that for almost 150 years have ment father. How would you even go about doing such a thing with a language that has thousands of speakers spread all over the world? The only thing it would cause is confusion. Yes, Esperanto started out as an experiment, but this has been essentially irrelevant for many decades now, as it has entered the domain of the living languages. So let's give Esperanto the kind of respect afforded to Russian or German - don't think of it as something we can tinker with anymore. Esperanto will not conform to our ideas of a perfect auxlang. Deal with it.
I think it's precisely that attitude that's been keeping Esperanto from reaching its full potential all these years. Certainly Esperanto can be tinkered with, as can English, as I pointed out. I'd say the speakers of the language (particularly the females) are more deserving of respect than the language itself. Living languages don't change easily, but they do change; you can be sure of that.
As a female, I can say that Esperanto having a feminine suffix is really one of the things that bothers me the least.
I would prefer that men stop acting disrespectfully towards women, rather than have a fake sense of "equality" in the form of a useless masculine suffix in Esperanto.
Cliff Jones Jr - Are you still learning Esperanto? Are you still interested in what does or does not help Esperanto "reach its full potential"? I've started addressing some of these points in what is turning into a whole series on YouTube. Link to part 1 is in the video linked below. I got so many helpful and interesting comments on the first video that I made a part 2. More to come after that!
Kial "patroj" devus signifas "parents"? Mi neniam aŭdis pri tio. Mi pensas ke vi parolas Esperanton dum mallonga tempo, se oni estus fluparolanto kiel oni povus ŝanĝi la signifon de "patro" laŭ la menso? Ĝi estas tre ofte uzata vorto.
Imagu ke iu decidas ke en la angla lingvo la vortoj "father" kaj "dad" ktp. estontece signifos "parent" - ĉu vi povus facile ŝanĝi vian propran paroladon kaj aŭskultadon?
Evidente, en ĉiuj lingvoj, vortoj ŝanĝiĝas tra la centjaroj, sed estas tre freneza ŝanĝi nenature la sencojn de vortoj pro via opinioj aŭ volaĵoj. Tamen, mi bone komprenas ke vi nur volas helpi la mondon (principe virinojn), do, mi proponu krei novajn vortojn anstataŭe, kiel "matro". Mi ne ŝatas la ideon sed ĝi estas pli bona ol subite ŝangi la sencon de "patro", kiu jam havas gravan rolon en la lingvo.
Briefly in english - Imagine if someone suddenly said that "father" and "dad" now meant "parent". Would you just be able to adjust? Obviously, the meanings of words do change over time, but "Father" is a very significant word in the language and will not change very soon. I understand that you are trying to help and I don't want to stomp on that good intention, but may I suggest that if your problem is with the suffix "-in" that you introduce a new word "matro" rather than trying the change the meaning of an ingrained word. It will certainly be more effective (although I don't particularly like it because I love the affixes system and it's kind of the point of Esperanto).
If the question were talking about "gepatroj," it would have said "gepatroj." Stop being offended by proxy.
Who knows? Usually, when people say they've had a long day a lot, they're talking about work.
Are they implying that "good fathers" have to work long days to provide for their family? Why?
Is it because "it's the place of the man to provide"? Would it be as simple as integrated gender roles? Possible...
Is it an echo of the propaganda of a capitalist society, always equating people's self-worth with how much money they are making? Pressing people to work more, putting in long hours in fear of getting fired, of not being able to pay their mortgage and bills and provide comfort for their children. Leveraging this fear to keep people docile...
Is it a bit of both?
Maybe it means "fathers who spend a lot of time with their kids sure find days to be very long". In which case it might be about stay-at-home dads.
And you apparently got very little from his 151 words - especially his first two. "Who knows?" To me, these two words means that he doesn't know. I see more questions than answers.