From <@FINHUTC.HUT.FI,@SEARN.SUNET.SE:LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET> Mon Mar 8 17:18:22 2010 Return-Path: <@FINHUTC.HUT.FI,@SEARN.SUNET.SE:LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET> Received: from FINHUTC.hut.fi by xiron.pc.helsinki.fi with smtp (Linux Smail3.1.28.1 #14) id m0ovCPD-0000PYC; Thu, 4 Nov 93 23:39 EET Message-Id: Received: from FINHUTC.HUT.FI by FINHUTC.hut.fi (IBM VM SMTP R1.2.2MX) with BSMTP id 8902; Thu, 04 Nov 93 23:39:58 EET Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (NJE origin MAILER@SEARN) by FINHUTC.HUT.FI (LMail V1.1d/1.7f) with BSMTP id 8901; Thu, 4 Nov 1993 23:39:55 +0200 Received: from SEARN.SUNET.SE (NJE origin LISTSERV@SEARN) by SEARN.SUNET.SE (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 1222; Thu, 4 Nov 1993 22:39:07 +0100 Date: Thu, 4 Nov 1993 17:51:17 GMT Reply-To: Colin Fine Sender: Lojban list From: Colin Fine Subject: Re: TECH: more thoughts on zi'o To: Veijo Vilva Content-Length: 1083 Lines: 25 JImc asks (re Russian): ++++++++> The distinction between unidirectional and multidirectional verbs of motion: is this like xodit& (walk around) vs. podxodit& (walk up to X2)? (Or whatever preposition.) My teacher explaned this as a imperfective/perfective distinction. I could understand why podxodit& is perfective, but I couldn't really see why xodit& had to be specifically imperfective; I felt you could walk around perfectively. >++++++++ The way that preverbs work in Slavonic (and also in Georgian ta'o, and I believe in Gothic) is that they are historically all directional, but have acquired a perfective sense as well. Some preverbs have then lost the directional sense, and are left with only aspectual meaning (eg po- in Russian, ga- in Georgian and Gothic). You're then left without directed imperfective verbs, so they often get supplied suppletively. My Russian is very rusty, but as I recollect, xodit' is used with directional preverbs in an imperfective sense, and the bare xodit' is used only in the restricted imperfective sense of a frequentative. Colin