From - Wed Mar 13 12:47:24 1996 Reply-To: "Jorge J. Llambias" Date: Wed Mar 13 12:47:24 1996 Sender: Lojban list From: "Jorge J. Llambias" Subject: Re: Ordinal ROI: the very idea! To: lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu X-Mozilla-Status: 0011 Content-Length: 2856 Message-ID: la djan cusku di'e >1) mi pare'u klama le zarci > I for-the-first-time go-to the store > >2) mi paroi klama le zarci > I once go-to the store > >"roi", like its vaguer equivalents in TAhE, specifies a property of the >time (or space) interval over which the event of a bridi stretches. "re'u", like its companions in ZAhO, specifies the phase of the event which the bridi is describing. (For example, saying that I am at the start of going 100 times to the store is vaguer than saying that I go for the third time in an iterval in which I go 100 times.) >In Example 1, however, the effect of the "pare'u" is restrictive; >it picks out the first event within the main interval and makes it >what the whole bridi is about. Just like ZAhOs. They pick a phase and make it what the whole bridi is about. (With change 42, ZAhO and TAhE is essentially the same selmaho.) > This makes "re'u" not operate as an >interval modifier with respect to subintervals. Intervals subdivided >with "roi" can be sub-subdivided by using a ZAhO and/or more "roi"/TAhE, >for arbitrarily fine precision. "re'u" doesn't fit into this system. Yes it does: mi pare'u co'a klama le zarci I for the first time start going to the store. mi mo'u pare'u klama le zarci I conclude my first time going to the store. mi pare'u mure'u klama le zarci For the first time (in some interval) I go to the store for a fifth time (in a sub-interval). (In previous subintervals I went at most four times in each.) mi reroi rere'u klama le zarci I twice went to the store for a second time. (e.g. I went once every day this week, but Monday and Wednesday I went a second time.) >Instead, its function is really parallel to that of tanru modification: > >3) le nu mi klama le zarci cu krefu fi li pa > The event-of my going to the store is-the-repetition numbered-1 > [of some stream of my goings to the store] > >is really what is meant. That can be said of every other tense as well: le nu mi klama le zarci cu rapli li pa My going to the store occurs only once. is really what is meant by example (2). The point of having tenses is to be able to say in the main bridi the main relationship that we want to express. >So while the parallel between "roi" and "re'u" is tempting, I believe >that it is not necessary to have "re'u", nor does it fit well into the >ROI selma'o. I believe that it does fit well with the other "tenses", and that it is necessary and useful. Indeed, it has already been used several times (not only by me) in general conversation, which is more than what can be said for many, maybe even most, other cmavo. Jorge