Now learn the difference, at your proper cost, / Betwixt true valour and an empty boast.

I’ve been thinking about the neatness of the Esperanto “propra” = “own”.

ĉiu propran saĝon posedas
everyone possesses their own wisdom

Notice how the English translation requires us to restate the possessive adjective (“their”) to complete the phrase – but if you’re truly honest with yourself, you know that the word “own” should be sufficient alone to get that meaning across – just like “propra” is sufficient in the Esperanto. So the English method just leaves a bad taste in the mouth.

Esperanto’s “propra” is very useful for talking in generalities:

per propra volo
by one’s own will

Interestingly, though it sounds weird to my ear now, I learnt that English’s “proper” was used like “own” too. Makes sense – they’ll both have descended (like some other languages) from Latin’s “proprius”. Wiktionary has quotations ranging from 1596 to 1946. Including my post title and this:

Each animal has its proper pleasure, and the proper pleasure of man is connected with reason.
Bertrand Russell, A History of Western Philosophy

My title usage, and the first usage of “proper” in the above quote actually both seem to correspond more to Esperanto’s “mem” rather than “propra” – a way of emphasising the ownership introduced, i.e. “the animal’s pleasure and no other’s“.

However, the second usage “the proper pleasure of man” is almost looking like Esperanto’s “propra” without even having to restate the possessive – right?

But I suppose, because of how else English uses proper, it’s a bit too ambiguous to start working this in to everything:

everyone possesses proper wisdom
their own wisdom? or the correct wisdom?

Shame! But surely, at the very least, if English cared a jot about anybody’s feelings it would at least allow “everyone possesses own wisdom”. Alas not.

Thank goodness we have Esperanto 

p.s. I never really thought about the use of “proper” in “proper noun”. It’s not in contrast to “improper/incorrect” but instead “common” nouns. So it’s more like that older meaning of proper – it’s the “own” name of a specific thing – it belongs specifically to the thing being named. Which, as I think about it, seems a natural extension of one of the Latin “proprius” definitions: “special” or “particular”.