Re: [lojban] PU + ZEhA / ZAhO

[Jorge Llambías <jjllambias@gmail.com>]

On Sun, Mar 14, 2010 at 1:15 PM, tijlan <jbotijlan@gmail.com> wrote:
> How do you analyse/interpret/translate the followings? (Some of them
> are not grammatical according to jbofi'e (marked with "!") but are ok
> according to some jbopre, if I remember correctly. If you think it
> should be ungrammatical, leave it blank.)

They are all grammatical. It is a known bug of jbofi'e that it has
trouble with some elidable terminators. Insert an explicit "ku" in
those that jbofi'e rejects, and it will accept them.

>  1. pu ca gunka

"ca" doesn't really add much in the presence of another PU. "pu ca" is
"before the same time as [the origin]", which is the same as "before
[the origin]". The origin is normally the time of the utterance,
unless context suggests otherwise. So basically: "worked".

>  2. pu ze'a gunka

"before [the origin], for a while", "worked for a while".

>  3. ze'a ca gunka

"for a while, at the same time as [the origin]", "works for a while".

According to CLL, the "ca" after ZEhA indicates that it is the center
of the while that is at the same time as the origin, which means that
if the origin is the present, then the working extends some time to
the past and some time to the future. But "ca ze'a gunka" achieves the
same thing, so...

>  4. ze'a pu ca gunka (!)
>  5. pu ze'a ca gunka
>  6. pu ca ze'a gunka

The "ca" doesn't really add anything to "pu". These are "for a while,
before [the origin]" and "before [the origin], for a while". Not much
difference, if any, between them: "worked for a while".

>  7. pu ca'o gunka

"ca'o" puts the focus on the ongoing work, rather than on the event as
a totality. It is roughly equivalent to the progressive aspect in
English (the BE + ING form) so: "was working".

>  8. ca'o ca gunka (!)

"is working"

>  9. ca'o pu ca gunka (!)
>  10. pu ca'o ca gunka (!)
>  11. pu ca ca'o gunka

These would all be roughly "was working".

If the origin is something other than the time of the utterance, then
"pu gunka" could be "had worked" or "will have worked" instead of
"worked", "pu ca'o gunka" could be "had been working" or "will have
been working" instead of "was working", and so on. Don't expect very
exact translations without knowing the full context.

mu'o mi'e xorxes