Return-Path: From: cbmvax!uunet!ee.mu.OZ.AU!nsn Message-Id: <9107240157.AA07207@munagin.ee.mu.OZ.AU> To: Mark Shoulson Cc: nsn@ee.mu.OZ.AU, lojban-list@snark.thyrsus.com, nsn@ee.mu.OZ.AU Subject: Re: Correction of correction, to be corrected In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 23 Jul 91 10:19:06 EDT." Date: Wed, 24 Jul 91 11:57:50 +1000 Status: RO X-From-Space-Date: Wed Jul 24 00:15:22 1991 X-From-Space-Address: cbmvax!uunet!ee.mu.OZ.AU!nsn >Exactly what do you mean by being atist and not itist? There are two possible interpretations of compound tenses in Esperanto: one is aspectual, the other deals with simultaneity. In the first (itist), estis -ata is a past Imperfect, and estis -ita a past Perfect. In the second (atist), estis -ata is an Aorist (simple Past), and estis -ita a Pluperfect. This has been a very vexed question in Esperanto, especially in the sixties; the former school of thought is held by the majority and seems to be supported by Zamenhofian usage; the latter is defended by speakers of Germanic languages (English excepted), and some who fancy Esperanto as a "logical" language. I point out the pupu is not a Perfect tense, but a pluperfect; similarly, puca is not a past Imperfect (was -ing), but a simple past. >One thing, though. I don't think I agree that terminators are an >abomination from hell. Sure, they should be elided most of the time, but >they're sometimes worth keeping even when they can be dropped. And that >goes double for cu. One of the problems in this language is establishing a standard style. In the style I use, I regard unelided elidable terminators as a nuisance. We'll have to see how far the force of analogy extends in this community. BTW, as Mark pointed out, malseka is wet, not dry. I think I've still been translating it correctly as to'e sudga in my Polish thingy. Mark, do you want to put together a corrected version of the Marquis' journal? I'm sorta busy with the brochure. >Oh, and on an unrelated note: was anything ever done about giving 'cevni' >(god) a place for 'purview/bailiwick'? I think it really makes sense. It's in the new gismu list (1990). I used it in that manner. nick.