Re: [jboske] ta'e/na'o

["Jorge Llambias" <jjllambias@hotmail.com>]

la pycyn cusku di'e

> For the first part, this is less clear. I suppose the first thing to do is
> set aside all the
> {-roi}, which are purely count-cases (though {rauroi} may have a role to
> play, and {so'eroi}, too). What is left in English is an open ended list
> starting with "generally, usually, regularly} and moving down to
> {sporadically, rarely, occasionally} and the like. Some of these may prove
> to be only disguied case-counters, but there seem to be other factors here:
> "regularly" suggests a schedule or a plan (perhaps implicit).

If we consider the four members of TAhE, it seems to me that {ru'i},
"continuously", indicates one uninterrupted occurrence or an
uninterrupted series of occurrences such that at no point along
the interval the event is not happening. {di'i}, "regularly"
indicates as you say that the occurrences along the interval
follow some pattern. So {ru'i} and {di'i} are clear enough.

I take one of {ta'e}/{na'o} to mean that the occurrences along
the event are such that they are not quite "continuously", but
that they cover a significant/enough/representative part of the
interval. Most {roi}'s talk about number of times, {ta'e} or
{na'o} would talk about coverage of the interval, assuming they
are, like {ru'i} and {di'i}, purely a matter of distribution of
the occurrences in a given interval. Relative {roi}'s like
{so'a} and {so'e} are similar to this, but they focus more on
the number of times than on the distribution of those times.

Let's say we give that meaning then to {ta'e}. That leaves
{na'o}. Is it just that one covers more of the interval than
the other? But which one? And do we really need to make such
a fine distinction?

> Many of these
> seem also to be conditional (again possibly implicit): "(when so-and-so
> happens) such and such happens."
> I don't like bringing in intensional explanations -- other worlds or 
> whatever
> -- unless it is absolutely necessary, that is, until the problems they 
> solve
> outnumber and outweigh the problms they raise.

The main reason I introduced typicality across possible worlds
is that I cannot think of any other possibility in terms of
distribution along a time interval.

If {na'o} works as I say, we can say things like:

mi na'o djica le nu kansa do i ku'i mi mutce le ka tatpi
Normally I would want to accompany you, but I'm really tired.
Typically across possible worlds, I want to accompany you,
however in this world I am very tired. (So you can deduce
that this particular world is atypical in that I don't
want to accompany you.)

This seems like a useful meaning. Is there a competing candidate
meaning for {na'o}?

mu'o mi'e xorxes


_________________________________________________________________
Get faster connections?-- switch to?MSN Internet Access! 
http://resourcecenter.msn.com/access/plans/default.asp