"la dek-kvina de decembro, mil okcent kvindek naŭ"

Translation:December fifteenth, eighteen fifty-nine

June 1, 2015

This discussion is locked.


That's Dr. Zamenhof's birthday!


Ah, I was wondering the signifigance


Mi ne sciis ĝin, dankon!


La naskiĝtago de Doktoro Esperanto!


Ooh, that was also the year of Charles Darwin's "On the Origin of Species"! But that was November 24th :)


Am I the only one who is completely unable to hear the k in dek? :(


I hear it distinctly as well as all the letters - but this is written three years after that comment, I do not know if it was the same recording three years ago.


Isn't "mil okcent" translated to: "one thousand eight hundred"?

How is this translated to "eighteen" then?


Duo is translating the way of saying a year in Esperanto to the way of saying a year in English rather than directly translating it as "one thousand eight hundred fifty-nine"

I don't really like it either, but if they hadn't done it I don't think I would've realized it was a date


"eighteen" is used to represent the two first digits of 1859 in the English verbal representation of 1859. Esperanto represents 1859 in its own independent way, not having to translate literally the way it is done in English.


because the report button didn't have an option:

I put December 25, 1959, and got it right.


Why not "dek ok kvindek naŭ" or something alike?


I don't think that's an acceptable way of saying an year in Esperanto. You have to say it like a number.

  • 2314

Saying years like that is a quirk of English. Just about every other language treats years as single numbers. (e.g. 1999 would be said as "one thousand nine hundred ninety-nine" in every language except for English.) Since the English way is more complicated to learn and extremely rare, Esperanto doesn't use it.


@tvindy, yes you hre right about the quirkness of English (not just for 'year numbers'), but at least for the langs I am pretty fluid in, that way of pronouncing the year is the exception, at least partly. For example in French, ''for years between 1100 and 1999, there are two equally valid options'':

  • ''19 hundred 99''
  • ''1000, 900, 99''

, but before and after that intervall your (the second: mille neuf cent quatre-vingts dix neuf) sure is correct.

In German and in nordic langs that I know:

  • ~''19 hundred 99''

just mina deux cents...


In studying Esperanto, I often think "Wow, that's a weird way of saying that!", but then I realize that it's the English phrase that's weird and Esperanto is more logical.


Was that not accepted? I don't know why… Perhaps numbers are only said one way in Esperanto. Everything else tends to be quite standardised for of learning, so it wouldn't surprise me.

I think, technically, saying "eighteen fifty nine" or "eighteen hundred (and) fifty nine" could be considered slang of a kind, or just lazy, whereas "one thousand eight hundred and fifty nine" would be proper.


The idea could be that, to simplify, Esperanto represents a number by using a word for each digit.

1 8 5 9

mil okcent kvindek naŭ

I like it better than the various complications of various national languages.


What is the correct pronounce, "dek kvina" aŭ "dekvina"?


Correct writing is dek-kvina (one word by digit), but even if it woul be written dekvina, the pronounciation would be the same (tonical accent on the penultimate syllable, as for each word).


Isn't the 'k' just geminated like in Italian?

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