"Li havas sukceson, ĉar li kredas je la boneco de aliaj homoj."
Translation:He has success because he believes in the goodness of other people.
My first inclination here is to say "He is successful…" What experience have others had with that variation?
Can anyone tell me if there is difference between "bono" and "boneco", and if so what?
https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Esperanto/Appendix/Table_of_affixes says they are the same, but other sources translate "bono" as "good" and "boneco" as "goodness". Is there really any difference?
I, and every other Esperantist I've ever met, seem to treat them as two different but related concepts. And most English speakers I know, if the topic comes up, sees good and goodness the same way. The ~ec suffix lends an aspect of abstraction to the word. Using another word for illustration think of the difference between "an other" alio and "a difference" alieco. Same root, both are nouns, but the difference, to English speakers at least, is very clear.
Sama alieco inter "bono" (a good) kaj boneco ("an abstract sense of good").
Hmm... I'm still confused though. Duo says that la can also add abstractness to nouns, giving the examples amo vs. la amo, kulturo vs. la kulturo and espero vs. la espero. Is this doing the same as ~ec? If so, could you say ameco, kultureco, espereco etc.? Would this be understood as the same?
I can view a generalization as a form of abstraction. But I can also distinguish the abstract-concrete dimension from the general-particular dimension. Then I see the mentioned uses of "la" as generalizing, not abstracting (e.g., la amo = love in general), while -ec abstracts the essence ("eco") of something: ameco = eco de tio, kio estas amo.
I think one aspect that can create a problem for me as a native English speaker is that "good" is a kind of abstract notion in one of its meanings, as in "the tree of knowledge of good and evil" for example (la arbo de sciado pri bono k malbono). Bono = Tio, kio estas bona, rigardata en abstrakta, absoluta maniero.
Goodness then becomes an abstraction of an abstraction, in a sense. It becomes easy to confuse a quality with the quality of that quality. It is easier to separate the quality of a concrete good, such a when bono means "avantaĝo, profito, utilo" or "helpo, bonfaro."
Ah, dankon! What was confusing me was indeed that bono appeared to me to be already an abstract noun, but you've helped me a great deal by clearing that up. Though I still don't fully understand ~ec.
Li havas sukceson does not have any "pastness" in it. It is not a compound tense like in English (or German or French) where you use "to have ...ed" to signify that something happened in the past. No, "he has success" is just another way of saying "he is successful" – he is full of success :)
It might help to think that there are two different English words "has": one is an auxiliary verb used to form the present perfect tense, and the other is a transitive verb meaning, for example, to possess (something).
An example of the second "has": He has red hair. Substitute "possesses": He possesses red hair. Grammatical.
An example of the first "has": He has succeeded, Substitute "possesses": He possesses succeeded. Not good English!