1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: Esperanto
  4. >
  5. "Mi amas la naturon apud la m…

"Mi amas la naturon apud la maro."

Translation:I love nature beside the sea.

August 1, 2015



I am a native English speaker who has lived in London, New Orleans, and San Diego.

The use of nature in this situation does not seem natural to me. The phrase natrural envrionment seems better but still clunky. I would use the word environs.


Also a native English speaker (Australian), and I agree. Nature is generally a word we use to describe all of nature, not just one particular part of it. I would use landscape, terrain or countryside here instead of nature.


I used "environment" and "natural atmosphere" and both times I was marked wrong.


Environment seems better to me as well. Or "habitat", even.


Why is "the nature" not accepted? Where the question say la naturon


Because it's common in Romance languages to use the definitive article before a noun to refer to a generality rather than anything in specific.

"Tiel estas la vivo." = "That's how life is." or "Such is life." Here, "la vivo" refers to life in general, not any life in specific.

"Mi amas la naturo." = "I love nature." Here, "la naturo" refers to nature in general.

"Mi neniam komprenos la virinoj." = "I will never understand women." Here, "la virinoj" refers to women in general.

Mi esperas ke ĉi tio helpu vin!


Because in Esperanto one says "la naturo" in cases where you'd say "nature" in English.


it's a bit confusing though, because I'm pretty sure there were previous duolingo exercises in which abstract nouns (like la naturo) didn't require the definite article. can anyone clarify?


Esperanto is spoken by people from many different language backgrounds, so you'll hear different uses of the definite article. But because of its large influence from Romance languages, it's common to say things like "la naturo."


Yea, I've seen inconsistent use by Duolingo of this. I just came across a sentence "Sxi havas vastan scion pri multaj temoj." Following the logic of "Mi amas la naturon apud la maro," it implies that we should be saying "... la scion" instead of just scion to be consistent.


Ocean not accepted. Is it a different word in Esperanto?


Yes: oceano, not all that surprisingly.


Ocean is accepted now.


Considering that seas are not oceans, and oceans are not seas, and that Esperanto has a different word for each. Why would this accept the English word 'ocean' for the Esperanto word 'maro' when 'maro' means 'sea' and 'ocean' is 'oceano'?


I don't know any English speaker who would say a thing like this. I get that where we'd normally just say "nature" in Esperanto it's, "the nature", but in this particular sentence the English should also be, "the nature". Or, as others have suggested, another word/phrase entirely.


I think you're right. This use of "nature" doesn't seem natural to me. I think we'd be more specific, e.g. "I love the wilderness by the sea", "I love the vegetation by the ocean", or "I love the forest by the sea". Something like that.


Tie mankas unu "the" antaux "naturo". Estu "I love the nature beside the sea."

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