Received: from ELI.CS.YALE.EDU by NEBULA.SYSTEMSZ.CS.YALE.EDU via SMTP; Thu, 19 Aug 1993 15:06:55 -0400 Received: from YALEVM.YCC.YALE.EDU by eli.CS.YALE.EDU via SMTP; Thu, 19 Aug 1993 10:03:11 -0400 Message-Id: <199308191403.AA02776@eli.CS.YALE.EDU> Received: from CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU by YaleVM.YCC.Yale.Edu (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 3359; Thu, 19 Aug 93 10:01:52 EDT Received: from CUVMB.COLUMBIA.EDU by CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU (Mailer R2.07) with BSMTP id 2722; Thu, 19 Aug 93 10:04:30 EDT Date: Thu, 19 Aug 1993 10:04:25 -0400 Reply-To: vilva@viikki21.helsinki.fi Sender: Lojban list From: VILVA@VIIKKI21.HELSINKI.FI Subject: On my way home ... X-To: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu To: Erik Rauch Status: O X-Status: X-From-Space-Date: Thu Aug 19 06:04:25 1993 X-From-Space-Address: @YaleVM.YCC.YALE.EDU:LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET ... I came to think that quite often "an aspect of ..." is roughly the same as "a characteristic of ..." or even "a phase of". So it seems I arrived at a characterization of "aspect" in my previous posting although it never occured to me while I was trying to come to grips with the ZAhOs. ---- We can say that a Lojban bridi without a ZAhO corresponds to the unmarked aspect of some languages having aspects. In a sense the ca'o aspect is a marked unmarked aspect, if we consider ca'o to be a default at least under some circumstances. There may be one difference between the Lojban aspect and that of most of the NLs in that in Lojban the aoristic tenses may be freely intermixed with the marked aspects. Veijo ------------------------------------------------------------------ Veijo Vilva vilva@viikki21.helsinki.fi