[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]


> >Would "mi ba'o ze'u klama" mean that my going is over for a long time?
> Not what we would list in our common tenses, though I assume it is
> grammatical.  Quite often when you put tenses backwards like this,
> the parser will accept it, but consider that you have expressed two different
> tenses.  The first of these is an ellipsized sumti tcita variety.
> I just called up the parser to check this one, and that is indeed what it
> oparsed as:
> mi ba'o ze'u klama
> is
> mi ba'oku ze'u klama
> This should be a bit easier to interpret:  I go for a long time, in the
> aftermath of some event.

Then my interpretation of "mi pu'o co'u citka" as "I'm about to finish
eating" is wrong. It means something like "I finish eating, in the
'beforemath' of some event".

I like the other interpretation of double tenses, why should we have
to assume a "ku"?

And why is "mi ba'o klama" different from "mi klama ba'oku", but
"mi ba klama", the same as "mi klama baku"? Or isn't it?

How do I say "I'm about to finish eating"?

("mi bazi co'u citka" would be close, but it doesn't talk about my present
state of being about to finish, it only says what I'll be doing a short
time in the future.)