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:
Chris Burd <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
INTERLNG: Discussiones in Interlingua
Date:
Thu, 12 Apr 2001 19:15:58 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (31 lines)
On Thu, 12 Apr 2001 07:57:32 +1000, Edo Neilson <[log in to unmask]>
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

Claro, ma "polluitor" es alsi acceptabile, secundo me. Tal formas gemino es
satis frequente in interlingua: "scriptor"/"scribitor", "factor"/"facitor",
etc. Le un es forsan plus recognoscibile, le altere plus regular.

>A proposito, an 'editor' e 'processor' non serea preferibile a 'editator' e
>'processator' que io ha legite in messages recente?

De accordo, ma le formas in -ator es certo non incorrecte. Tal formationes
ultraregular es utile pro expression spontanee, e dunque incoragiabile.

Chris

ATOM RSS1 RSS2