numlk
17.06.14,17:39
docitala som sa,ze AJ je analyticky jazyk, kt. neobsahuje pripony a predpony, pomocou kt. by sme mohli urcit osobu,číslo,pád... Čo sú potom koncovky v slovách waitress, actress, teacher, books??? vsak viem, ze je to zensky rod/ 3. osoba....
ivka70
17.06.14,15:46
waitress, actress su samostatne slova, ktore skutocne oznacuju zensku osobu, ale takych je malo v Aj, a neexistuje pravislo, ze vzdy by sa z muz. slova tvorilo zenske koncovkou -ess a urcite ani k nim nevies pad
teacher - tam nevies nic, ani pad ani rod
books - to je mnozne cislo .... tam tiez nic nevies
Odkial mas teoriu: vsak viem, ze je to zensky rod/ 3. osoba?
teacher - tam nevies nic, ani pad ani rod
books - to je mnozne cislo .... tam tiez nic nevies
Odkial mas teoriu: vsak viem, ze je to zensky rod/ 3. osoba?
numlk
17.06.14,15:49
zensky rod viem pri waitress,actress vdaka tej pripone. 3. osobu pri rpidani -s ku slovesu...mnozne cislo napr. pri books..... ide o teoriu o analytickom a systetickom jazyku,kde sa uvadza anglictina ako analyticky kvoli netvoreniu pripon a predpon...trosku to nechapem
ivka70
17.06.14,15:55
zensky rod viem pri waitress,actress vdaka tej pripone. 3. osobu pri rpidani -s ku slovesu...mnozne cislo napr. pri books..... ide o teoriu o analytickom a systetickom jazyku,kde sa uvadza anglictina ako analyticky kvoli netvoreniu pripon a predpon...trosku to nechapem
nevies ju kvoli tej pripone, vies, ze to slovo ako take oznacuje osobu zenskeho rodu
ked si to porovnas so slovanskymi jazykmi, tak naozaj pripony a predpony padove a rodove Aj nema
aj to s v 3 osobe jednotneho cisla pri slovesach ti nic nehovori o rode (stale je to on, ona ono)
nevies ju kvoli tej pripone, vies, ze to slovo ako take oznacuje osobu zenskeho rodu
ked si to porovnas so slovanskymi jazykmi, tak naozaj pripony a predpony padove a rodove Aj nema
aj to s v 3 osobe jednotneho cisla pri slovesach ti nic nehovori o rode (stale je to on, ona ono)
Chobot
17.06.14,21:10
Prihlás sa na kurz angličtiny...
avalik
17.06.14,21:14
Prihlás sa na kurz angličtiny...
"mam Bc titul z jazyka (AJ, ucitelstvo)" - http://www.porada.sk/t238284-bc-titul-z-jazyka-kde-mozem-ucit-kedy-mozem-pokracovat.html#post2509824
"mam Bc titul z jazyka (AJ, ucitelstvo)" - http://www.porada.sk/t238284-bc-titul-z-jazyka-kde-mozem-ucit-kedy-mozem-pokracovat.html#post2509824
avalik
17.06.14,21:25
-ess
a suffix forming distinctively feminine nouns: countess; goddess; lioness.
Origin:
Middle English -esse < Old French < Late Latin -issa < Greek
Usage note
Since at least the 14th century, English has both borrowed feminine nouns in -ess from French ( -esse in French and in some early English forms) and applied the French ending to native or naturalized words, most frequently agent nouns in -er or -or. Some of the earliest borrowings—titles for the nobility and church dignitaries—are still in use, among them countess, princess, duchess, empress, abbess, and prioress. Of the scores of new nouns that were created from the 14th century on, many have long ago disappeared entirely from use: devouress; dwelleress. But many have survived, although their use has declined sharply.
Nouns in -ess denoting occupation or profession are rapidly disappearing from American English. Airlines now refer to cabin personnel as flight attendants, not stewards and stewardesses. In the arts, authoress, editress, poetess, sculptress, and similar terms are either rejected or discouraged and almost always replaced by author, editor, poet, sculptor. Nouns in -ess designating the holder of public office are hardly ever encountered in modern American usage. Women holding the office of ambassador, mayor, or governor are referred to by those titles rather than by the older, sex-marked ambassadress, mayoress, or governess. ( Governess has developed a special sense in relation to childcare; this use is less common in the U.S. than in Britain.) Among other terms almost never used in modern American English are ancestress, directress, instructress, manageress, oratress, postmistress, and proprietress. If the sex of the performer is not relevant to performance of the task or function, the neutral term in -er or -or is now widely used.
Some nouns in -ess are still current: actress (but some women in the acting profession prefer to be called actors ); adventuress; enchantress; heiress (largely in journalistic writing); hostess (but women who conduct radio and television programs are referred to as hosts ); millionairess; murderess ; seamstress; seductress; sorceress; temptress; and waitress (the substitute term server has not been widely adopted).
Jewess and Negress are usually considered offensive today. Mistress has given way to master in the sense of one who has acquired expertise in something: She is a master at interpreting financial reports. See also -enne, -ette, -trix.
ref.:http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/-ess
a suffix forming distinctively feminine nouns: countess; goddess; lioness.
Origin:
Middle English -esse < Old French < Late Latin -issa < Greek
Usage note
Since at least the 14th century, English has both borrowed feminine nouns in -ess from French ( -esse in French and in some early English forms) and applied the French ending to native or naturalized words, most frequently agent nouns in -er or -or. Some of the earliest borrowings—titles for the nobility and church dignitaries—are still in use, among them countess, princess, duchess, empress, abbess, and prioress. Of the scores of new nouns that were created from the 14th century on, many have long ago disappeared entirely from use: devouress; dwelleress. But many have survived, although their use has declined sharply.
Nouns in -ess denoting occupation or profession are rapidly disappearing from American English. Airlines now refer to cabin personnel as flight attendants, not stewards and stewardesses. In the arts, authoress, editress, poetess, sculptress, and similar terms are either rejected or discouraged and almost always replaced by author, editor, poet, sculptor. Nouns in -ess designating the holder of public office are hardly ever encountered in modern American usage. Women holding the office of ambassador, mayor, or governor are referred to by those titles rather than by the older, sex-marked ambassadress, mayoress, or governess. ( Governess has developed a special sense in relation to childcare; this use is less common in the U.S. than in Britain.) Among other terms almost never used in modern American English are ancestress, directress, instructress, manageress, oratress, postmistress, and proprietress. If the sex of the performer is not relevant to performance of the task or function, the neutral term in -er or -or is now widely used.
Some nouns in -ess are still current: actress (but some women in the acting profession prefer to be called actors ); adventuress; enchantress; heiress (largely in journalistic writing); hostess (but women who conduct radio and television programs are referred to as hosts ); millionairess; murderess ; seamstress; seductress; sorceress; temptress; and waitress (the substitute term server has not been widely adopted).
Jewess and Negress are usually considered offensive today. Mistress has given way to master in the sense of one who has acquired expertise in something: She is a master at interpreting financial reports. See also -enne, -ette, -trix.
ref.:http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/-ess
Chobot
17.06.14,21:49
Prihlás sa na kurz angličtiny...
"mam Bc titul z jazyka (AJ, ucitelstvo)" - http://www.porada.sk/t238284-bc-titul-z-jazyka-kde-mozem-ucit-kedy-mozem-pokracovat.html#post2509824
... a zadre takúto otázku?
"mam Bc titul z jazyka (AJ, ucitelstvo)" - http://www.porada.sk/t238284-bc-titul-z-jazyka-kde-mozem-ucit-kedy-mozem-pokracovat.html#post2509824
... a zadre takúto otázku?
Slayer666
20.06.14,08:58
Sweet Jesus, co vas na tych ucitelskych jazykovych smeroch ucia?
Zjednodusene povedane, analyticky jazyk znamena, ze gramaticke vztahy nevyjadruje priponami/predponami, ale samostatnymi slovami. Avsak tieto oznacenia sa nepouzivaju v absolutnom zmysle, ale skor v relativnom. Cize napr. norcina je analytickejsia ako polstina, ale syntetickejsia ako anglictina, ktora je zas syntetickejsia ako mandarinska cinstina. OK?
Anglicke podstatne mena nemaju gramaticky rod. Mozu sice oznacovat veci zenskeho rodu (ako actress), ale gramaticky ziaden rod pri anglickych podstatnych menach nie je. A uz vobec nie 3. osoba pre rany Kristove.
Aby si to lepsie pochopila, porovnajme si urcity clen v zapadogermanskych a severogermanskych jazykoch:
ANGLICKY:
The dog sleeps. The dogs sleep.
I see the dog. I see the dogs.
I gave it to the dog. I gave it to the dogs.
NEMECKY:
Der Hund schläft. Die Hunde schlafen.
Ich sehe den Hund. Ich sehe die Hunde.
Ich gab es dem Hunde. Ich gab es den Hunden.
NORSKY:
Hunden sover. Hundene sover.
Jeg ser hunden. Jeg ser hundene.
Jeg ga det til hunden. Jeg ga det til hundene.
ISLANDSKY:
Hundurinn sefur. Hundarnir sofa.
Ég sé hundinn. Ég sé hundana.
Ég gaf það hundinum. Ég gaf það hundunum.
Ako vidno, anglictina a nemcina vyjadruju urcity clen samostatnym slovom, v tejto jednej veci su teda analytickejsie nez norcina alebo islandcina, ktore ho vyjadruju priponou. Ten seversky sposob je, ak sa nemylim, povodny. Zapadogermansky urcity clen vznikol neskor. Ale mozno si to pletiem so zamenom this/dies.
Na druhej strane, je zjavne, ze nemcina syntetickejsie vyjadruje pady nez norcina. Jednak urcity clen meni svoju formu podla padu (a cisla a rodu, samozrejme), ale tiez podstatne meno niekedy pribera koncovku (napr. si vsimni, ze pluralova koncovka -e sa v dative pluralu meni na -en). Mimochodom, tvar dem Hunde je uz dnes zastaraly, pouziva sa dem Hund. V 20. storoci sa prestala tato pripona pouzivat, ale stretnes sa s tym este v Kafkovi, Mannovi, a teraz som otvoril Rothov Radetzkymarsch (1932 tusim) a tam je to tiez. Tiez iny slovesny cas v tej tretej, dativovej vete by som normalne pouzil, keby som to niekomu rozpraval, ale chcel som vo vsetkych styroch jazykoch pouzit jednoduchy minuly cas, aby vynikli tie ostatne rozdiely.
Tiez si mozes vsimnut, ze v norcine je vo vsetkych osobach (naozaj vo vsetkych, aj tu nie su vsetky) v pritomnom case rovnaky tvar, ktory sa ale lisi od infinitivu. Cize ta ista pripona vsade. Zas anglictina ma este stale to -s v 3. osobe singularu (par storoci dozadu to vsak bolo -th). A tiez -st v 2. osobe singularu, ale ta sa uz az na Bibliu a niektore britske narecia nepouziva (I give, thou givest, he gives...). Na druhej strane, nemcina a islandcina maju podstatne syntetickejsie slovesa nez anglictina a norcina.
V anglictine (a norcine) sa dativ v tomto pripade musi vyjadrit predlozkou 'to'. To ju tiez robi analytickejsou.
No a je jasne, ze islandcina je z tychto styroch najsyntetickejsia. Jednak podstatne meno berie padovu priponu, ale berie aj priponu urciteho clena, ktory sa podobne ako v nemcine lisi v jednotlivych padoch/rodoch/cisle. Je to najkonzervativnejsi germansky jazyk.
Tie norske a islandske priklady nemusia byt bez chyb, ale malo by to byt spravne.
Zjednodusene povedane, analyticky jazyk znamena, ze gramaticke vztahy nevyjadruje priponami/predponami, ale samostatnymi slovami. Avsak tieto oznacenia sa nepouzivaju v absolutnom zmysle, ale skor v relativnom. Cize napr. norcina je analytickejsia ako polstina, ale syntetickejsia ako anglictina, ktora je zas syntetickejsia ako mandarinska cinstina. OK?
Anglicke podstatne mena nemaju gramaticky rod. Mozu sice oznacovat veci zenskeho rodu (ako actress), ale gramaticky ziaden rod pri anglickych podstatnych menach nie je. A uz vobec nie 3. osoba pre rany Kristove.
Aby si to lepsie pochopila, porovnajme si urcity clen v zapadogermanskych a severogermanskych jazykoch:
ANGLICKY:
The dog sleeps. The dogs sleep.
I see the dog. I see the dogs.
I gave it to the dog. I gave it to the dogs.
NEMECKY:
Der Hund schläft. Die Hunde schlafen.
Ich sehe den Hund. Ich sehe die Hunde.
Ich gab es dem Hunde. Ich gab es den Hunden.
NORSKY:
Hunden sover. Hundene sover.
Jeg ser hunden. Jeg ser hundene.
Jeg ga det til hunden. Jeg ga det til hundene.
ISLANDSKY:
Hundurinn sefur. Hundarnir sofa.
Ég sé hundinn. Ég sé hundana.
Ég gaf það hundinum. Ég gaf það hundunum.
Ako vidno, anglictina a nemcina vyjadruju urcity clen samostatnym slovom, v tejto jednej veci su teda analytickejsie nez norcina alebo islandcina, ktore ho vyjadruju priponou. Ten seversky sposob je, ak sa nemylim, povodny. Zapadogermansky urcity clen vznikol neskor. Ale mozno si to pletiem so zamenom this/dies.
Na druhej strane, je zjavne, ze nemcina syntetickejsie vyjadruje pady nez norcina. Jednak urcity clen meni svoju formu podla padu (a cisla a rodu, samozrejme), ale tiez podstatne meno niekedy pribera koncovku (napr. si vsimni, ze pluralova koncovka -e sa v dative pluralu meni na -en). Mimochodom, tvar dem Hunde je uz dnes zastaraly, pouziva sa dem Hund. V 20. storoci sa prestala tato pripona pouzivat, ale stretnes sa s tym este v Kafkovi, Mannovi, a teraz som otvoril Rothov Radetzkymarsch (1932 tusim) a tam je to tiez. Tiez iny slovesny cas v tej tretej, dativovej vete by som normalne pouzil, keby som to niekomu rozpraval, ale chcel som vo vsetkych styroch jazykoch pouzit jednoduchy minuly cas, aby vynikli tie ostatne rozdiely.
Tiez si mozes vsimnut, ze v norcine je vo vsetkych osobach (naozaj vo vsetkych, aj tu nie su vsetky) v pritomnom case rovnaky tvar, ktory sa ale lisi od infinitivu. Cize ta ista pripona vsade. Zas anglictina ma este stale to -s v 3. osobe singularu (par storoci dozadu to vsak bolo -th). A tiez -st v 2. osobe singularu, ale ta sa uz az na Bibliu a niektore britske narecia nepouziva (I give, thou givest, he gives...). Na druhej strane, nemcina a islandcina maju podstatne syntetickejsie slovesa nez anglictina a norcina.
V anglictine (a norcine) sa dativ v tomto pripade musi vyjadrit predlozkou 'to'. To ju tiez robi analytickejsou.
No a je jasne, ze islandcina je z tychto styroch najsyntetickejsia. Jednak podstatne meno berie padovu priponu, ale berie aj priponu urciteho clena, ktory sa podobne ako v nemcine lisi v jednotlivych padoch/rodoch/cisle. Je to najkonzervativnejsi germansky jazyk.
Tie norske a islandske priklady nemusia byt bez chyb, ale malo by to byt spravne.