Zamenhof Letter Excerpt

This short letter answers a deceptively difficult question: after a past verb such as memoris, should a following clause use havas or havis? Zamenhof's response is valuable not because every private letter creates a rule, but because it shows an expert writer choosing tense for meaning rather than mechanically copying another language's sequence of tenses.

The excerpt is letter 302, dated 19 March 1908, in the public-domain Originala Verkaro. The wording below follows the verified scan transcription; only line breaks have been regularized.

The complete excerpt

Kara sinjoro! — Laŭ mia opinio ambaŭ formoj (1. mi ne memoris ke la vorto havas kaj 2. mi ne memoris ke la vorto havis) egale bone povas esti uzataj; ĉio dependas de la nuanco, kiun vi volas doni al via penso.

A close English rendering is: “Dear sir! In my opinion both forms—(1) I did not remember that the word has and (2) I did not remember that the word had—can be used equally well; everything depends on the nuance that you want to give to your thought.” The last phrase is intentionally close to the historical wording. Natural contemporary English would more likely say “the nuance you want to express.”

The greeting: a noun phrase outside the clause

Kara is an adjective and sinjoro a noun, both singular. There is no verb and no accusative -n because the phrase directly addresses the recipient; it is a vocative, not an object. English Dear Sir works similarly, but English capitalization habits should not be imported as a grammatical rule. Modern Esperanto normally writes a common title in lowercase here, although courtesy capitals occur in older correspondence and remain an accepted personal choice.

The dash after the exclamation mark visually separates the greeting from the answer. That compact opening is characteristic of printed correspondence of the period, not a required modern punctuation pattern. A current email can simply put the greeting on its own line.

This fresh imitation keeps the same vocative but moves into neutral contemporary letter style. Notice vin later in the sentence: unlike profesoro, it really is the direct object of dankas and therefore takes -n.

Framing an opinion without weakening it

The preposition laŭ presents a standard, source, or viewpoint: “according to.” Mia opinio therefore stays without -n, since an ordinary preposition already marks its role. Ambaŭ means “both” and does not take -j; plurality appears on formoj. The adverbs egale bone modify the passive verbal group povas esti uzataj, while uzataj agrees with the plural subject ambaŭ formoj.

This is not empty hedging. Zamenhof immediately identifies the variable that makes both choices possible: the intended nuanco. In analytic prose, laŭ mia opinio marks responsibility for an assessment while leaving the factual material available for discussion.

Havas and havis: viewpoint, not automatic backshift

With havas, the embedded statement is presented as valid at the reference point from which it is stated: the word has two forms. Esperanto does not automatically change a present tense to a past merely because the reporting or mental verb is past. That contrasts sharply with the common English pattern I didn't remember that the word had two forms.

With havis, the possession itself is placed in the past. In a suitable context, that can imply an earlier historical stage or simply view the fact as part of the past situation being recalled. Zamenhof's brief answer does not spell out one fixed interpretation; he says that the speaker chooses according to the nuance intended. Contemporary detailed grammar makes the same larger point: Esperanto tense should locate the embedded event or state, not reproduce English backshift by reflex.

The printed excerpt has no comma before ke inside the numbered examples. Modern edited prose normally uses one, as the fresh examples on this page do. That editorial convention does not alter the tense contrast.

This fresh imitation uses estas because Monday closure is presented as a standing schedule, not merely a state limited to yesterday.

Here estis places the closure in the past. The contrast is semantic. It is not a choice between “Esperanto tense” and an exceptional literary tense.

The conclusion: a semicolon and a relative clause

The semicolon joins two independent but tightly linked claims: both forms are possible; the choice depends on nuance. Dependas de is a conventional verb–preposition frame, so la nuanco has no accusative ending after de. In the relative clause, however, kiun is the direct object of doni and therefore takes -n. Its antecedent la nuanco does not determine that case; the relative pronoun's role inside its own clause does.

Doni nuancon al penso is intelligible, elevated historical prose. A modern editor would often prefer esprimi nuancon, doni nuancon al la frazo, or montri la celitan nuancon. The historical wording is evidence of accepted expressive range, not the one model every present-day message must imitate.

This imitation preserves the clause architecture while choosing a more idiomatic contemporary collocation.

What the letter proves—and what it does not

The basic tense endings -as and -is, the accusative on kiun, and the agreement of uzataj belong to Esperanto's foundational grammatical system. The choice between havas and havis is accepted variation governed by meaning. For learners, the best practical recommendation is to reconstruct the underlying statement: is it “the word has two forms” or “the word had two forms”? Then keep the tense that expresses that time relation.

The letter itself is attested historical usage and valuable evidence about Zamenhof's reasoning. It is not part of the Fundamento, and it does not make every personal habit in early correspondence obligatory. Current prose usually adds the comma before ke, avoids unnecessary courtesy capitals, and may replace the literal collocation doni nuancon al penso.

For the complete productive system behind the contrast, see reported statements and relative time without sequence-of-tense backshift.

Key Takeaways

• Reconstruct the thought being reported, then choose -as or -is for its actual time relation.
• A vocative such as kara sinjoro has no -n, while a true object such as vin does.
• Zamenhof's attested wording illustrates the system but does not make every historical punctuation or collocation obligatory today.

Common Mistakes

Backshifting only because English does

Use the tense of the reported thought. If the desire was already past even at the time of speaking, volis can be right, but English backshift alone is not a reason.

Putting an accusative on a vocative

Making ambaŭ agree like an adjective

Copying historical collocations as the only modern option