1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: Esperanto
  4. >
  5. "Infano estas ido de homo."

"Infano estas ido de homo."

Translation:A child is an offspring of a person.

June 6, 2015



This sentence was clearly written by an alien compiling a report for his extraterrestrial overlords…


For the first time in my life, I heard for the word offspring in this course. Every time I get to this kind of questions, I see that (strange) word again. Finally it came to my mind what that word means, it means descendant.

So the answer "A child is a descendant of a person" is accepted.


Ĉu tial infanoj estas homidoj?

I mean, it fits the pattern.


I think that is probably what alien esperantists would call humans, or maybe even teranidoj (earth-members-offspring)


Mi ŝatas "teranidoj"


Why wouldn't "Infant" be an acceptable translation of "Infano?" Does anyone have a solid explanation for that?


Bebo = baby/infant

Infano = child


The problem lies with various forms of English. That is, because many people who speak some forms of English do not use infant to mean child; this is despite the legal definition of infant being a person under the age of 18, and the usual UK definition of infant being a child of between about 3 and 8 (as in infant school).

So yes, you can use infant to mean child, it just wouldn’t be understood that way in the US, or probably Australia either.


Interesting, I hadn't heard about this unusual usage of infant before. I'll group it in with pants, fries, surcharge, and colors.


I knew that in the US “pants” meant trousers, “fries” meant chips and “colors” meant colours. I didn’t know that there was a difference with surcharge; are you referring to the technical accounting term? You get loads of technical terms, which tend to change meaning quickly and appear to be unrelated to the original word; my favourite is “deprecate” which means to pray against an evil (roughly) but in computing terms is about removing a feature (I’m using feature in English here - not as in computing) of an application or system.


In the US, common usage for surcharge is a government fee or a charge to pass on such a fee. Most commonly you see these in utility bills. I was quite surprised to find any list of charges is a 'surcharge' in the UK. The discrepancy has undoubtedly been propogated by those same utility companies. The get out of including these items in advertised prices.


I don't like the translation "an offspring". It would work better with "the offspring", but that wasn't an option.

I will research this a little, but I do not believe that "offspring" is a count noun in English.


What about "a child is human offspring"? It was marked wrong but I'm not sure


I feel like in that sentence "Human" would be an adjective to "Offspring", so in my mind it would have been "Infano estas homa ido" or something similar.


that is how I wrote it


"A child is a human being's offspring" worked for me I guess it is just putting the "being" so that is it clearly a noun and not an adjective that makes it ok


According to your translation, homo = "human being", not "humans". The translation "... of humans" is better english but "of a human" is technically correct because it is not a plural. Change homo to bovo and your wouldn't translate it "... of cows".


Shouldn't it be 'the' offspring? ... 'An offspring' just sounds wrong in relation to a child/person


So can I call "child" homido" in esperanto?


I translated infano with baby but it was marked wrong


It's a false friend. "Infano" looks like infant (which is an english synonym for baby) but it means "child". "Baby" is "bebo".


No. Infant is more usually an English synonym for a child. Think of Infant Schools. They are definitely not for babies! I realise that Esperanto is different from English and will have different ranges for words of similar meanings but, from what is on Duolingo, it appears that 'bebo' could be a baby, toddler, or young infant. An older infant or an older child would be 'infano'. Does 'infanoj' also cover children from birth to adulthood (as child would in English)?


I'll see your "infant school" and raise you "infant formula". There are some exceptions where infant might be used more broadly, particularly in some regional dialects (we don't have Infant Schools in Australia for instance) but generally speaking, an infant is a baby. I'm prepared to be proven wrong but check your dictionary... #1 definition on dictionary.com is "a child during the earliest period of its life, especially before he or she can walk; baby." Macquarie dictionary (my go to for Australian English) keeps it more straightforward: "a baby".


Accepted - though OED gives: a child between four and eight as 1.1 and, since my vocabulary is largely decided by how I have seen or heard a word used, then I used the most common usage (to me). Mea culpa. I should have used a dictionary before commenting. However, further research reveals that, in law, the definition is "A person who has not attained legal majority", i.e. A person under eighteen years old (or even twenty one). http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/infant


Further research using my paper dictionaries shows that Chambers (a dictionary published in Scotland - probably the best single volume dictionary of UK English) gives both "Babe" and "A person under the age of legal maturity".
Asking around I find that all (UK) graduates that I know give the meaning as "child" rather than baby, this is probably because they all went to Infant School as children.

Edit: At last, after over a month of asking random people, ( tens of them - OCD or what) I have found one person who translated the English word "Infant" into "baby" as her first choice. She did accept that it also meant child though!


OK. So the other exercise where Duo translates INFANO with BABY is wrong :-) Or maybe I AM wrong :-)))


Just to confuse this otherwise pretty much settled issue, today I saw in an article the word "suĉinfano" (literally suck-child, ie a child who has not been weaned). This is another word that we can use for "baby".


I wrote it as: "A child is a kid of a person." Seems harsh to be given wrong as the previous question gave "idojn" as 'kids.'


Again with a new word for something we've already had. What about "geknabo"? Or am I overthinking this?


"Geknaboj" is always plural and means "boy(s) and girl(s)". "Infano" means "child".


Ilia flago estas blua ;)


What is the difference between persono and homo? And if there is no difference which is better to use in certain context or which is used more in everyday speech?


It's the same difference as between person and human in English. In most places they could be switched around though (in fiction at least) you could be a person but not a human.


I guess humans are animals


Why would people not work instead of humans? Can someone please explain?


Is “A child is a man's offspring” wrong?


Homo estas a human person, not a man or a woman.


En ĉi tiu epoko, kie infanoj estas faritaj en la laboratorio, homo povas havi idojn. Mi memoras kiam ne necesitis du, kaj ne ĉiam estis sufiĉaj.


sounds like they want to breed people... oh well /=


So, "child" should be "homido"




You say - a kitten is an offspring of a cat, a puppy is an offspring of a dog... also a child is an offspring of a human/person/man...

Basically there is no need to emphasize that there are two, it is implied.


These are good examples, but I would word them as follows:

1- A kitten is the offspring of a cat. 2- A puppy is the offspring of a dog. 3- A child is the offspring of a human/person/man.

I just think that sounds better. And, again, it's because 'offspring' doesn't refer to objects / entities you can count. It's a general term referring to progeny.

Curious to hear the opinion of UK speakers and other native speakers on this point. Thanks in advance.


I don't think 'an offspring' works because, to me, 'offspring' is a non-count noun. But 'the offspring' is fine, and just plain 'offspring' may work, too.


Offspring is not a non-count noun. You can have one offspring or more offsprings.


I had never heard ‘offsprings’ before, but it seems to be a valid, though very old fashioned, plural.


However, not all agree: https://www.grammar-monster.com/plurals/plural_of_offspring.htm


Here's a note from Grammar Monster on this topic:


I don't know GM, so I can't vouch for the level of its authoritativeness. But what they say here sure matches up with my feeling about that word. For me, it doesn't work as a count noun, and I would never use it that way.

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