From jjllambias@hotmail.com Fri Jun 30 16:41:44 2000 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 10412 invoked from network); 30 Jun 2000 23:41:43 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by m3.onelist.org with QMQP; 30 Jun 2000 23:41:43 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO hotmail.com) (216.33.240.178) by mta1 with SMTP; 30 Jun 2000 23:41:43 -0000 Received: (qmail 22527 invoked by uid 0); 30 Jun 2000 23:41:43 -0000 Message-ID: <20000630234143.22526.qmail@hotmail.com> Received: from 200.42.153.116 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Fri, 30 Jun 2000 16:41:43 PDT X-Originating-IP: [200.42.153.116] To: lojban@egroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] Opposite of za'o Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2000 16:41:43 PDT Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed From: "Jorge Llambias" la adam cusku di'e >I think that "za'o" is a certain take on "still" & companions, >and is often a good translation for it, but sometimes >the event has not passed any kind of a potential end >(whether natural or not) but nevertheless might be marked >with "still" in English. Could you give some example? It may be as you say, but to me "still" has a strong component of "beyond expectation". >In these cases you can use "co'unai" >or "mo'unai" according to the context. But {co'u} and {mo'u} refer to the transition point between action and non-action. "still", "already", "no longer" and "not yet" refer to the part where the event is happening or not happening, not to the turning point. >Thus, in some >circumstances, "co'u" and "mo'u" would be good translations >for "no longer". Maybe, but the focus is completely different. Can you think of some examples? {ca co'u} does not mean "is now over", that is {ca ba'o}. {ca mo'u} means "it is right now being finished". It refers to the transition, the same as {co'a}. >I think that "pu'o" is generally a good translation for >"not yet". Both say that the event has not yet started, >and neither imply that the event will actually happen. But there is a very significant difference! "Not yet" refers to an event that *should* have started but hasn't, while {pu'o} refers to a situation where an event is about to start, but there is nothing in it to suggest that it should have already started. "She has not arrived yet" is very different from "she is about to arrive". They give different information. >Thus, "already" could sometimes be "na pu'o/pu'onai", I can't imagine how that one could work. To me that does not even say that the event need be happening. >"co'u na", or "mo'u na", These are just {co'a}, aren't they? {mo'u na} is even contrary to "already" because if the not-happening is complete it is even natural that the happening should start, whereas "already" has the contrary expectation. >but intuitively "already" doesn't >contain any negation, as you pointed out, and I can't >think of any one word for it. It is certainly the potential ZAhO that I miss the most. >I think that ZA'Onai is na ZA'O since to me this is most >intuitive, and since 'nai' is supposed to be negating >the ZA'O, and na ZA'O is a negated ZA'O, whereas ZA'O >na is still a type of affirmative ZA'O. That make sense. It could be confusing, since ZAhOnai and ZAhO na sound so close, but we just have to pronounce carefully. {nai} does not always negate, sometimes it marks the opposite, which is why at some point I proposed {za'onai} for "already", because they are some kind of opposites, but yes, I agree with your reasoning. co'o mi'e xorxes ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com