From a.rosta@pmail.net Sun Feb 13 14:31:02 2000 X-Digest-Num: 363 Message-ID: <44114.363.1976.959273826@eGroups.com> Date: Sun, 13 Feb 2000 22:31:02 -0000 From: "And Rosta" Subject: RE: Re: Subjunctives > From: "Adam Raizen" > > la xorxes cusku di'e > > > From: "Jorge Llambias" > > > > la adam cusku di'e > > > > >I disagree. It seems to me that the x1 of vanbi is the geneal way to > > >express places like the x3 of binxo. In other words, "loi bisli cu > > >binxo loi jaclitki le nu glare" doesn't necessarily mean that any ice > > >actually becomes liquid water, if it never gets hot enough. Likewise > > >if "vanbi" is the main bridi. Even when you use the tag "va'o" as in > > >the above sentence, the main bridi is only being claimed under the > > >condition of the tagged sumti, as if an "under conditions" place was > > >added to the main bridi. > > > > I'm not sure why you say you disagree. I agree with what > > you say, which means that va'o by itself, without da'i, > > already tags a hypothetical. > > Maybe I misunderstood you, but I had thought that you had just > said that you accepted that "va'o" without "da'i" claims the main > bridi with the tagged sumti as its environment, whereas I was > saying that the main bridi does not necessarily occur if what is > tagged by "va'o" doesn't occur. I don't understand either of you. The main bridi is true only if the va'o sumti obtains, but (at least without da'i -- I'm not sure what difference it would make) "broda va'o le nu brode" claims that both broda and brode obtain. Hence va'o would seem to be more appropriate to translate "I work under difficult conditions" than "I work if things are difficult". --And.