From @YaleVM.YCC.YALE.EDU:LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET Tue Aug 24 20:16:10 1993 Received: from ELI.CS.YALE.EDU by NEBULA.SYSTEMSZ.CS.YALE.EDU via SMTP; Wed, 25 Aug 1993 10:34:23 -0400 Received: from YALEVM.YCC.YALE.EDU by eli.CS.YALE.EDU via SMTP; Wed, 25 Aug 1993 00:18:50 -0400 Message-Id: <199308250418.AA00807@eli.CS.YALE.EDU> Received: from CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU by YaleVM.YCC.Yale.Edu (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 5143; Wed, 25 Aug 93 00:17:22 EDT Received: from CUVMB.COLUMBIA.EDU by CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU (Mailer R2.07) with BSMTP id 8075; Wed, 25 Aug 93 00:19:52 EDT Date: Wed, 25 Aug 1993 00:16:10 EDT Reply-To: Logical Language Group Sender: Lojban list From: Logical Language Group Subject: Re: TECH: QUERY on ZI & ZEhA X-To: jorge@phyast.pitt.edu X-Cc: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu To: Erik Rauch Status: O X-Status: >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. Because of the grammar, it would be poor form to write the two words as a single 'tense compound', and you correctly haven't. On the other hand, ze'uba'o can be written as a single compound because the lexer compounder treats it as a grammatical unit. (lexer/compounder rules are those with rule numbers greater than 900 in the YACC grammar). lojbab