"Pluraj reguloj klaras."

Translation:Several rules are clear.

July 7, 2015

This discussion is locked.


Anyone else mess up and put many for pluraj?


I thought they were synonyms actually


pluraj = several, multaj = many. Are many and several synonyms?

  • 3073

I'm not the one you're addressing, but yes.


Thank you. I was going by Merriam-Webster which defines several as "more than one (but fewer than many).” And while one can say “too many” I have never heard “too several.” So I think it expresses a different quality.


Pluraj is simply "more than one." Kelkaj is ne tre multaj. Multaj is "a large number of." So, strictly speaking, pluraj coud be more than multaj or fewer than kelkaj, even thought multaj is more than kelkaj.

So... I wouldn't expect these to map perfectly onto English words regardless of what Merriam-Webster says.


Unua regulo: Vi ne parolu pri la klubo de lukto. Dua regulo: VI NE PAROLU PRI LA KLUBO DE LUKTO!


Tio cxi auxdatas kiel "pluraj releguloj" por mi.


I think it's because of how he trills the R's.


Pluraj (2 syllables) reguloj (3 syllables). he says "Pluraj reguloj" with 6 syllables: "Plurja je reguloj".


Sounds good to me. Have you tried headphones?


I was using headphones when I did the course, yes. The sound is not slurred as if there is a stretched, possible second syllable; it's practically a glottal stop between the syllables..


In that case, my advice is to use this sentence as ear training. This is how real people really talk.


Salivanto is right. If you can connect to the on-line station "Muzaiko", Then listen carefully during the interviews. Folks will often trill their R's in ways to which most English speakers are unaccustomed.

Besides, it's good practice for hearing the language and there's some decent music there.


Prefere por mi estas "pluraj reguloj estas klaraj"


In fact, you are totally right here. The preferred form is "estas klaraj". My understanding is that there is some internal debate on the Duolingo team (nothing wrong with that) and that the apparent preference that the course has for using adjectives as verbs ("klaras" instead of "estas klaraj") is due to the personal preference of a few individuals. There is nothing wrong with saying "klaras" in the right context, but it is my opinion that putting such an emphasis on this form at this stage in learning gives the wrong impression to new learners. In the exter-dualingo world, it's preferable to say "estas klaraj" here.


Tiu ĉi regulo estas tre klara! Dankon!


I'm with you now on this aspect of Eo. Initially I thought that verb-izing adjectives was cool, but (a) it seems a bit tricky to process, and (b) it seems that it's not altogether common. I'd prefer to stick with adjectives being adjectives.


On the other hand, as a Japanese speaker, it is quite natural for certain adjectives to be used just like verbs (in Japanese, at least). This structure to me makes sense, but that's probably because of the Japanese influence... Interested to see which structure other speakers of Japanese prefer when learning Esperanto.


Ideally, the primary language of an Esperanto speaker should have no influence on the grammatical structure of their Esperanto. Just as with other language pairs.

There is a difference between “verbizing adjectives” and saying that a verbized adjective should mean the same as “esti” + adjective. Of course you can verbize “rapida” but the meaning of “rapidi” is not “esti rapida:”

  • La knabo estas rapida = the boy is fast.
  • La knabo rapidas = the boy is hurrying.
  • La knabo rapidas hejmen = the boy is hurrying home.

By equating the first and second meaning Esperanto would require another way of expressing the meaning of „to hurry.“

  • 3073

Is "many" really a bad synonym for "several"? I'm not sure if I should report it or not.


Klaraj reguloj estas bonaj reguloj.

Simile, klara parolado estas bona parolado.

[deactivated user]

    Mi adas aŭdi "pluraj jeliguroj"--ĉu alio ajna spertas ankaŭ tiun ĉi?


    I don't know if this sentence has audios from different speakers; listening to the ”original” male voice (the one with studio conditions, no reverberation) I clearly hear ”reguloj,” with a tiny little shwa between ”pluraj” and ”reguloj” (”pluraj-ə-reguloj”). The alternative would be a clear break between the two words, which might sound unnatural. I agree that the ”ə” may be a bit longer than necessary.

    (”Does anybody else…” translates, to be precise, to ”ĉu iu alia…”)

    [deactivated user]

      Dankon, mi forgesis la "ĉu" ^^ Kvankam mi pensas, ke "ajna alio" pravu laŭ ĉi tiu diskuto: https://forum.duolingo.com/comment/30532417


      La regulo eldonis regulojn.


      this was really difficult to understand. the "r" sounded sort of like an "h"


      I've heard Europeans complain that English treats R like a vowel. So there is no surprise if a continental R sounds odd to us native borns.


      Kial ne, "Multiple rules clarify."

      • 2345

      "Clarify" is transitive, so the rules would have to be clarifying something rather than being clear themselves.

      "Multiple" would be any whole number more than one. That means that there might only be two rules, which would be too few to be several.


      On January 13, 2018, in a thread on the forum that's going to be removed from Duolingo on March 22, 2022, I wrote:

      Well, I just saw another one. I was already following the thread from who knows when...


      I received the following update:

      EsperantoH wrote on "Pluraj reguloj klaras.": Kial ne, "Multiple rules clarify."

      And within a very short time the thread is 404. No bad words posted. It's highly unlikely that EsperantoH is the original poster. It's still a mystery.

      Four years later I can open the thread no problem. It's still a mystery. :-)

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