From cowan Tue Oct 3 11:34:27 1995 Subject: Re: tense conversions From: John Cowan To: slobin@feast.fe.msk.ru (Cyril Slobin) Date: Tue, 3 Oct 1995 11:34:27 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: from "Cyril Slobin" at Oct 3, 95 05:37:18 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] Content-Type: text Status: OR X-Mozilla-Status: 0011 Content-Length: 1156 Message-ID: <9X4P43GDLVM.A.FwG.Jw0kLB@chain.digitalkingdom.org> mi joi la kir. cusku be di'e casnu > > > Are you saying that {ca pu'o} means the same as {ba co'a}? I don't agree. > > That doesn't follow. As I said the other day, {ba co'a} entails nothing > > about the present; the event might already be in progress. {ca pu'o} excludes > > that possibility. > > {ba co'a} claims that start of the event is in the future. How can event > be in progress in the present if it's start is still in the future? Oops, sorry, I was reading {ba co'a} as {ba ca'o}. A bit too close there, maybe. In that case, the distinction is different. A claim that the beginning of an event (tenseless) in the future is not the same as claiming that the present moment in the inchoative period. For example, suppose a volcano tomorrow. If the earth around it is grumbling and farting, it would be clear that the present moment is in the inchoative of the eruption. However, if the eruption without warning, then -- as far as ground-based observers are concerned -- the inchoative period is still in the future. -- John Cowan cowan@ccil.org e'osai ko sarji la lojban.