1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: Esperanto
  4. >
  5. "Lambs are offspring of sheep…

"Lambs are offspring of sheep."

Translation:Ŝafidoj estas idoj de ŝafoj.

June 5, 2015



haha that's fun to say :) It's kind of like a little Esperanto tongue twister :P


Here's a few more: http://www.uebersetzung.at/twister/eo.htm

Fair warning, the background is... bright haha.


NB, komencantoj: The stress is always on the next-to-last syllable, so it's ŝafoj and NOT ŝafidoj, but ŝafidoj. It is extremely similar to the case of the Welsh language.


What is the difference between de and da in terms of usage?


De is belonging and da is amount.


Easy to remember with bElong and Amount


I remember them by the letters in what they mean: De - PossEssion/PropErty Da - QuAntity So far I never made any mistakes yet, it doesn't take long to think of the right word


Since sheep is singular, wouldn't it be be "Sxafidoj estas idoj de sxafo"?


If it were singular, it would have been written “a sheep.” The plural of sheep is sheep, and it’s not a mass noun, so it must be plural here.


It's so self-explanatory in Esperanto.


Not sure if I want to report this as a mistake, because I think it might not be: I wrote "Ŝafidoj estas la idoj de ŝafoj" and was denied because of the 'la.' Is that really an incorrect translation? If so, why?


Duo won't accept it unless he specifically says 'the' in his sentences.


I noticed this too, as i frequently accidentally use the word "THE" and get marked wrong for this small error. On a plus side, i suppose this means paying extra attention to detail and also not taking the scores too seriously


The rule I saw elsewhere is "The main difference between the use of the definite article in Esperanto and in English is that in Esperanto the article, with a singular noun, may be used to indicate an entire class." I picked up that habit from Bulgarian, and it seems it is standard in Esperanto as well. In this case the direct translation from English (without article) strikes me as less correct. But the rule does say "may," not "must."

The reason the article to designate an entire class is helpful is because Esperanto lacks the indirect article ("a"), so if you leave off the article when talking about a class, it's ambiguous whether you are referring to the class or an individual member of it.

Ugh, that got technical. But it is what I was thinking!

  • 2428

Does anyone know the etymology of "sxafo"?


I'm surprised that "sxafidoj" and "sxafoj" cause a "typo" result, because I've previously seen the -x digraphs accepted as substitutions.

Edit: Never mind, I looked more closely and apparently I'd used the accusative endings. That was the error it picked up.

  • 2428

Are you using the app instead of the website? I've encountered that, too. I think it's an issue in the app. I've never had a problem with the x-notation on the website since they've implemented it.


And they're really cute!!!


I'm just wondering why "idojn" is incorrect and "idoj" is the right choice?

  • 2428

Because verbs like "to be" do not take direct objects. There is no action, just a state of being.


About the English sentence... Why "offspring" is not in plular? Or is its plular itself? It is the first time I meet this word.

  • 2428

"Offspring" does not have a plural form. It's like "sheep" that way.



Autocorrect tried to change this to: Ŝafidoj estas idoj de Aaron. LOL.


Why would "la ŝafidoj" be incorrect here? It means 'the lambs'. ''The lambs are the offspring of the sheep"

  • 2428

Saying "the" or omitting it is the difference between the general case or a specific instance. It does change the meaning and the two are not equivalent.


I think you should report it.

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