...thus begins the revolutionary cartoon based on a fictional marine sponge...
Well that's polite of him. Apparently men in Denmark don't wear clothes at all.
He wear his (someone else's) man-pants?
I think you meant “Li portas sian virpantolonon”, “he wears his own man-pants”
From what I understand "pantanolo" refers to the whole pair of pants as one, is this correct?
According to the Universala Vortaro: [Esperanto français, English, Deutsch, русский, polski.]
port' porter | pack, carry | tragen | носить | nosić.
According to English Wiktionary:
From Italian portare.
"It's from Latin portō".
Dankon. This made me wonder what to carry is, which happens to be porti as well, so aside from context how can it be known that an article of clothing is being worn as apposed to being carried?
In Swedish (my native language), "(att) bära" can mean
- to carry; to lift and transport anywhere else
- to wear; e.g. a piece of clothing or jewelery
among other things, and you understand from context which one it is.
It actually seems to correspond rather well with the Italian portare
(and when I looked it up, the Swedish word seems to be distantly related to what in English is called "burden", but that's just my speculations).
So, in short, I guess we should be able to say something along the lines of
"Li portas pupon, kaj lia pupo portas ĉemizon kaj pantalonon."
and we have no idea of whether the doll wears the shirt-and-trousers, or carries the shirt-and-trousers (while we, or at least I, can assume that he's just carrying the doll). ;-)
By using derrivatives of porti, you can be more specific. For example, 'surporti' only means 'to wear'. It literally means 'to carry on'.
How does one say "trouser leg" in Esperanto - "pantalonkruro"?
(example: Imagine having to explain that you fell, because you stumbled when you got your foot stuck in one of the trouser's legs.)
"krurumo" -- if you're feeling particularly silly, try "kruringo." :-)
It's pant...singular....not plural. Pantalono = Pant, Pantalonon = Pant(as it's objective)
If it was plural, shouldn't the word be 'pantalonojn'?
Pants are generally pluralized in English, I believe, because of the two pant legs. We never call them pant, only pants.
pantalono = (a pair of) trousers
- as in the item "a pair of trousers"
pantalonoj = several (pairs of) trousers
I think you're getting downvotes because this is in the lesson notes.
It sounds like he's saying "Ili", but with the first 'i' quickly. That threw me off...
Which translation is wrong? If you mean "pantalono" (singular) is wrong, you might check the notes for the lesson as well as the other comments in this thread.
The explanation on pants=pantalono is on the first line of these notes.
Thank you, very much. I have a problem, I'm russian, and I"m twelve, so sometimes I'm wrong. I'm sorry.
Problem... I have intermediate level of English and sometimes I'm wrong. It is a problem. All is well.
We are all are still learn! We all make mistakes, I still make mistakes in English and I am native speaker. We must learn from our mistakes, to improve our ability in speaking languages :)