"Grandfathers are people."

Translation:Avoj estas homoj.

3 years ago

16 Comments


https://www.duolingo.com/Atueerd2

No they aren't...

3 years ago

https://www.duolingo.com/jrobinson
jrobinson
  • 15
  • 14
  • 13
  • 12
  • 8
  • 8

What's more common- homoj or personoj?

3 years ago

https://www.duolingo.com/salivanto
salivanto
  • 23
  • 13
  • 8
  • 1048

I just did a quick check by looking at word frequency in two recent Esperanto publications. "Homoj" is more common. It's important to consider the intended meaning, however. It's like asking which is more common in English: human (being) or person?

If you consider the semantic space occupied by "human (being)" and "person", a similar semantic space is occupied by "homo" and "persono". The difference is that "homo" (compared to "human") is a little broader in meaning and use and will be seen in many contexts where we say "person" in English - such as the one in the OP.

The core meaning of "homo" however, is human being - so if you mean human being, you HAVE TO say "homo". If you want to emphasis personhood, that is, the rights of the individual or the division of God into three persons... you have to say "persono."

1 year ago

https://www.duolingo.com/jxetkubo
jxetkubo
  • 14
  • 11
  • 10
  • 9
  • 6

In the sense of "people" homoj is more common.

3 years ago

https://www.duolingo.com/VirgilSchmidt

Jes, mi auxdas "homoj" pleofte.

3 years ago

https://www.duolingo.com/salivanto
salivanto
  • 23
  • 13
  • 8
  • 1048

I disagree. At the very least, I think it's the wrong question. They mean different things.

1 year ago

https://www.duolingo.com/NoctuaCuriosa

Is the difference similar to "people" versus "persons" in English? (So, for example, although it is linguistically acceptable to say, "Grandfathers are persons", it would come across as awkward or legal-ish.)

1 year ago

https://www.duolingo.com/MauricioBailey

Would "Avojn estas homojn." have been accepted also?

3 years ago

https://www.duolingo.com/faust.twi
faust.twi
  • 12
  • 10
  • 9
  • 5
  • 3
  • 2
  • 2

no accusatives after 'estas'

3 years ago

https://www.duolingo.com/jxetkubo
jxetkubo
  • 14
  • 11
  • 10
  • 9
  • 6

No, it wouldn’t, esti (“to be”) is not a transitive verb, but a linking verb. It cannot take a direct object, hence no accusative here. It links two parts of the same rank which are both in the nominative.

In connection with a verb the accusative is used only for direct objects. These verbs are called transitive. (Mi vidas lin.I see him. versus Min vidas li.He sees me.).

There are intransitive verbs which do not take an direct object. (Mi dormis.I slept.)

And there are linking verbs as explained. (Mi iĝos kuracisto.I will become a doctor.)

Because in English only with some pronouns (I/me, we/us, she/her, he/him, they/them) the accusative is marked, it is difficult to see it in English examples. And because of the lazy use (Is it me? instead of Is it I?).

2 years ago

https://www.duolingo.com/EYF2003
EYF2003
  • 25
  • 10
  • 9
  • 6

whats wrong with avojn correct solution is "avoj"anyone have an idea what i did wrong?

2 years ago

https://www.duolingo.com/Melenhawenn

Did you write "Avojn estas homoj(n)"? Avoj is subject, it has to be nominative, as homoj because "homoj" = "avoj", none of them is an object.

2 years ago

https://www.duolingo.com/jxetkubo
jxetkubo
  • 14
  • 11
  • 10
  • 9
  • 6

Esti (to bo) is a linking verb. It links to things on the same level, neither is an object. So there is no accusative.

2 years ago

https://www.duolingo.com/akaorenji

Did you just say "avoj?"

2 years ago

https://www.duolingo.com/EYF2003
EYF2003
  • 25
  • 10
  • 9
  • 6

yes

2 years ago

https://www.duolingo.com/akaorenji

Haha it's asking for more than a one-word answer

2 years ago
Learn Esperanto in just 5 minutes a day. For free.