INTERLNG Archives

Discussiones in Interlingua

INTERLNG@LISTSERV.ICORS.ORG

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Kjell Rehnstrom <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
INTERLNG: Discussiones in Interlingua
Date:
Thu, 12 Apr 2001 19:56:29 +0200
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (32 lines)
Edo Neilson wrote:

> Salute!
>
> Emerson RZ ha scribite:
>
> >"Somos le major polluetor (?) del mundo, ...."
>
> Io ha trovate in le IED:
> tribuer [tribu-/tribut-]  e
> polluer [-lu-/-lut-]
>
> Le principal formationes del verbo 'distribuer' son:
> distribuer > distribute > distribution > distributor
>
> Inde, le principal formationes del verbo 'polluer' serea:
> polluer > pollute > pollution > pollutor
>
> A proposito, an 'editor' e 'processor' non serea preferibile a 'editator' e
> 'processator' que io ha legite in messages recente?

Si, certo. Isto es forsan un exemplo de hypercorectitude. Il es naturalmente
preferibile usar editor, precessor. Ego suppone que il es le verbos processar
e editar que es frequentativos (o como illos se appella) que es formate de un
verbo -er, ma le substantivos es formate secundo le verbo simple _eder >
edite, editor, proceder, process- processor e de isto on ha le verbo
frequentative _processar_ que differe un poco de _proceder_.

Alteres pote facer un optime explication linguistic.

Cellus

ATOM RSS1 RSS2