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


la djan cusku di'e
> la xorxes. cusku di'e
> > I think:
> >       zo'e broda ZAhO le nu brode = ca le nu brode ku zo'e ZAhO broda
> The trouble with this equivalence is that "ca" is aorist, so doesn't get
> the right effect.  If we say that one event is simultaneous with the
> aftermath of another, we do >not< exclude that they might overlap, because
> the first event might have started before the second event ended.

I'm aware of this, but I don't understand why this is a problem. Why is the
"right effect" that the event inside the sumti should acquire a contour from
the ZAhO tag? To me it seems strange that the ZAhO should give a contour to
two events. To get this effect, I would use two ZAhOs. And also, it is more
or less clear what the two contours would be for "ca'o", "ba'o" and "pu'o",
but what about the rest? What does it mean that they overlap or not when,
for instance, using "za'o". What is the "right effect" in this case?

        mi klama za'o le nu carvi

would be
        ca le nu carvi ku mi za'o klama

That is, my keeping going occurs at the time of the raining, no matter
when it started to rain. If we want to be more precise

        mi klama za'o le nu co'a carvi

would be
        ca le nu co'a carvi ku mi za'o klama

In this case, I keep going at the time when it starts to rain.

Under the current interpretation,

        mi klama za'o le nu carvi

means that I go as it keeps raining for too long, but it is not clear how
my going is related to the persistent rain. Is my going occuring only in the
"for too long" period of the rain? Very strange.

> To solve this problem, we must change your "ca" to "ca'o" which is obviously
> circular.

First we have to agree that it's a problem.