Message-Id: <m0tCoi6-0000ZTC@xiron.pc.helsinki.fi>
Date:         Tue, 7 Nov 1995 06:24:47 -0500
Reply-To:     Logical Language Group <lojbab@ACCESS.DIGEX.NET>
Sender:       Lojban list <LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET>
From:         Logical Language Group <lojbab@ACCESS.DIGEX.NET>
Subject:      Re: perfective counting & katna
To:           Veijo Vilva <veion@XIRON.PC.HELSINKI.FI>
Content-Length: 1401
Lines: 28

I missed the context of this, but

>Jorge:
>> It is not clear how {za'o} behaves as sumti tcita, since it hasn't
>> been used much as such. I would prefer that it be like {co'a} and
>> {co'u}, and not like {ba'o} and {pu'o}.
>[...]
>> the case of {pu'o} and {ba'o}, where the tag simply has a totally
>> different effect when used as sumti vs. selbri tcita.
>
>I thought that the meaning of ZAHO as sumtcita is still undecided, or
>at least up for grabs. If the meaning {puo} and {bao} as sumtcita is
>certain, then can we not take it that other ZAHO behave likewise? I
>find it strange that {coa} and {cou} not behave like {puo} and {bao}.

There is actually more usage of ZAhO as sumtcita than as inflection, and
the first usages in text were as sumtcita, which is part of the reason they
ended up "backwards" in that context from their inflection ary role (though
there are other reasons of course - let's not reopne that can of worms).

za'o le nu citka to me would refer to the time period after the meal that my
son continues to return to his plate and nibble on the dregs (he sometimes has
leftovers for dessert, just like his papa, but in his case, his nibbling seldom
stops at the nominal end of mealtime, unless he physically removes his plate
from table and dumps it into the sink (and not always then, because he'll pick
at the serving dish waiting to be packaged for preserving).

lojbab