Message-ID: <39D6D38D.11DF4D80@math.bas.bg>
To: lojban@egroups.com
References: <4.2.2.20000929211350.00af48b0@127.0.0.1>
From: Ivan A Derzhanski <iad@MATH.BAS.BG>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Mailing-List: list lojban@egroups.com; contact lojban-owner@egroups.com
Precedence: bulk
Date: Sun, 01 Oct 2000 09:02:53 +0300
Subject: Re: [lojban] symmetrie of tenses
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Length: 1359
Lines: 33

"Bob LeChevalier (lojbab)" wrote:
> At 08:57 PM 09/29/2000 -0400, pycyn@aol.com wrote:
> >[...] the inchoative need not be followed by the event abuilding,
> >while the perfective must be preceded by the event fading out.
> >Something could prevent even the most verged on impending ...
> >event, prevent it from happening at even the last moment.  But
> >only an event that happens has a perfective aspect.
> 
> Is this necessarily true?
> 
> There would be be a nuclear winter in the aftermath of WW III,
> sounds like it would be expressed with a perfective, but luckily
> it is not an event which has actually happened.

Pycyn's point was that while an event need not happen in order
to have an actual prelude, only an event that happens can have
an actual aftermath (in your example the nuclear winter is
counterfactual, as is WW III).

So in this world.  Ask the White Queen about Looking-Glass-land.

--Ivan


-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
TranslationZone.com - The Source for Professional Translators.
We offer TRADOS Freelance Edition 3 at the low price of $695 
when you publish your profile at TranslationZone.com.
http://click.egroups.com/1/9538/4/_/17627/_/970382445/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

To unsubscribe, send mail to lojban-unsubscribe@onelist.com