They're not necessarily marrying each other (though the sentence implies "vi kaj Sofia" probably are)!
Zamenhof, kiam viaj infanoj geedziĝos?
Sorry to be so pedantic.
Certe, sed mi povas havi mian ŝercojn. :D
Cetere: La nepo de la frato de Zamenhof anstataŭ vivas en Kalifornio.
She spent a few years traveling in the US during the '30's teaching both Esperanto and the Baha'i Faith. Then, when she was told by immigration that her visa had expired, she was offered the choice of marrying one of her students or going back to be with her family.
She went back to Poland.
You can read some of it in Esperanto, here: http://bahaaeligo.bahai.de/U-tekstoj/fama-U.htm
Many people have those names, like the fictional one true pair of this educational soap opera.
Did our little knabino already grow up? I'm so proud of her :) We've been together since the beginning.
Usage question: does this imply that you and Sofia are getting married to each other, or is it just about getting married in general?
The same sorts of confusion potentially exist in English. 'When are you two getting married?' doesn't have to mean to each other. A lot of comedy has been culled from "We're married, just not to each other." etc.
If it helps, it works like this:
- she will get married = ŝi edziniĝos (literally: she will become a wife)
- he will get married = li edziĝos (lit. he will become a husband)
- they (♂♀) will get married = ili geedziĝos (lit. they will become spouses/husband and wife)
- they (♂♂) will get married = ili edziĝos (lit. they will become husbands)
- they (♀♀) will get married = ili edziniĝos (lit. they will become wives)
Also note that geedziĝi/edziniĝi/edziĝi do not necessarily imply marrying eachother, similar to "marry" in English.
For example, "Hieraŭ dudek homoj geedziĝis ĉi tie" (Twenty people married here yesterday) would of course imply ten couples, and you likely won't get strange looks if you ask "Kiam viaj filinoj edziniĝis?" (When did your daughters get married?)
Is the pronoun iŝi (feminine plural) used at all in Esperanto? Should we or could we say "they (♀♀) will get married = iŝi edziniĝos?
I've never even seen that word and I've been a part of the Esperanto community for over 20 years. From whence came iŝi?
RaizenM has otherwise already answered your question.
I got it from here https://issuu.com/apamexico/docs/the_sixteen_rules_of_esperanto (see rule#6). And I can see now that although there is an entry for iŝi on Wikipedia (https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/i%C5%9Di) it also defines its usage as rare and not official. Slavic and even some romance languages make a distinction between masculine and feminine plural pronouns (ex. Polish one, French elles) so, being native in two slavic languages, I never even doubted about the usage of iŝi in Esperanto. It's good to hear from an "old" Esperantist about the actual use of some words, thank you!
Hebrew and Yiddish sometimes will use the feminine "they" also, but Zamenhof decided against the idea.
If you look here: http://www.genekeyes.com/Dr_Esperanto.html#Grammar you can see the grammar and the sixteen rules as he laid them out. No mention of "they" having gender.
Edziĝi literally means to become a husband, so it's used for a man. Edziniĝi is feminine and geedziĝi refers to both genders, so I assume it's used for couples.
However, because of the recent ruling in the United States, lots of couples are now able to edziĝi and edziniĝi! :)
I challenge anyone to tell me that the ge- prefix shouldn't be used with same-sex pairs.
the ge- prefix is for coupling the male and female of the pair in quesstion to denote the pair together. It's use to show that the male AND female are the constituants of the pair. if there are two males or two females, no need for ge-
Being trans is totally irrelevant here. Cis man + trans man is still edziĝi and cis woman + trans woman is still edziniĝi!
It is general, but in normal context it would mean that they will marry each other. If there was any doubt you could add "unu kun la alia". Or, more often seen: "Kiam vi edziĝos kun Sofia?" Or "Kiam Sofia edziniĝos kun vi?" :-)
Lidia is the shady character who you don't meet until the end who then explains their dastardly plan giving you just enough time to escape unscathed.
Lydia Zamenhof was the youngest child of the family. She died in, I seem to remember, Treblinka.
It could, but usage makes that either the marriage of two men - which might get certain conservative elements nonplussed, or what happens to a groom but tends to ignore his new wife.
Personally I think of marriage as a team sport, and so I prefer to use the ge~ for my edziĝi.
Bone, kaj gratulojn. Ankaŭ ni (la edzino kaj mi) geedziĝis antaǔ 20 jaroj.
Only if the meaning is "get married " and only if the subject is a man. For a woman one would say "edzinigxi"
Right. It's spelled out elsewhere in this thread - but a man edzigxas, a woman edzinigxas, and a mixed couple geedzigxas.
wow! never knew sofia was a polyamist! ( j/k: to me, "you" is strictly plural)
for the same reason "ni" is strictly plural; it refers to more than one person, etymologically.
I can't (easily) find that in the etymology given on Wiktionary; could you share a source for that?
I could argue that etymology does not really dictate current usage per se, and it seems strange to go against the ubiquitous singular usage of the common word "you", but I'm less interested in that now than in your last comment.
The second person plural pronoun has always been ye (subject) and you (object). The singular is thou/thee. It's just that ordinary usage has reduced all these to a generalized "you". The story is long and convoluted :). Thee can see a synopsis here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_personal_pronouns#Archaic_and_non-standard_forms The 1st person pronouns are: Singular subject: I; singular object, me; plural subject, we; plural object, us. The third person has its own set.
Interesting; I'll read that sometime soon, if I remember to. I guess it would have had to be "ye" anyway to have your original interpretation, then, right? Thanks for the link.
But thou shouldst remember that the speaker, who is (presumably) a normal person, is probably using the singular.
EDIT: Ignore this. I had been misinformed.
"Vi" used to imply plural "you" and "ci" singular "you", or "thou", but nowadays you will rarely hear "ci" used except for swearing or bible quotes. Now "vi" is used for both singular and plural.
Actually, in the 16 Rules section of the Unua Libro, Z only gave "vi" for both singular and plural. He introduced "ci" in the Ekzercaro (while at the same time saying "one ordinarily uses "vi" instead of "ci"........."ordinarily" being the key word ;) ) And some do use it to denote strictly singular without any swearing or offense involved (e.g. a couple of Esperantist Quakers of my acquaintance)
I've also heard it to define some sort of class distinction. Ci for one's social inferiors and small children. Vi for one's equals and superiors. Rare though, very rare.
That's only because people don't pay attention. Zamenhof himself admitted that the "informal/formal" distinction is from OUTSIDE influence of other languages. I.e. it's not something inherent in the word.