Date:  Mon, 29 Dec 1997 22:17:50 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <199712300317.WAA09769@locke.ccil.org>
Reply-To: Chris Bogart <cbogart@QUETZAL.COM>
Sender: Lojban list <LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET>
From: Chris Bogart <cbogart@QUETZAL.COM>
Subject:      Re: Ali kicked the dog repeatedly
X-To:         lojban <lojban@cuvmb.cc.columbia.edu>
To: John Cowan <cowan@LOCKE.CCIL.ORG>
Status: OR
X-Mozilla-Status: 0011
Content-Length:  997
X-From-Space-Date: Mon Dec 29 22:17:51 1997
X-From-Space-Address: LOJBAN@CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU

Robin poses:
>>>>       Ali kicked the dog repeatedly.

Jorge proposes:
>>            i la alis so'oroi jmada'i [tikpa] le gerku

Mark disposes:
>I can't help thinking there's an event contour or something just for =
this;
>there's something insufficient about "so'oroi" for "repeatedly" in this
>sense.  {za'o}?  Hrm.

How about something from TAhE:  I'm not real clear on the difference =
between the TAhE tenses: ta'e=3Dhabitually, di'i=3Dregularly; =
na'o=3Dtypically, ru'i=3Dcontinuously.  Would {ru'i} be right, or would =
that imply a single, continuous act of kicking rather than a bunch of =
short kicks.  Maybe {di'ize'i}?

 I don't think any of the ZAhO contours would be quite right.  Another =
possibility might be the zu'o abstraction, which is like {nu} but =
"cyclic, repetetive":

      .i tu'a la alis. zu'o jmada'i le gerku
        or
      .i zu'o la alis jmada'i le gerku

But it's an awkward solution since it throws an unnecessary abstraction =
into the translation.

Chris