From lojbab@lojban.org Fri Sep 29 18:19:19 2000 Return-Path: X-Sender: lojbab@lojban.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@egroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-6_0_3); 30 Sep 2000 01:19:19 -0000 Received: (qmail 10791 invoked from network); 30 Sep 2000 01:19:19 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by m2.onelist.org with QMQP; 30 Sep 2000 01:19:19 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO stmpy-1.cais.net) (205.252.14.71) by mta1 with SMTP; 30 Sep 2000 01:19:18 -0000 Received: from bob (dynamic249.cl8.cais.net [205.177.20.249]) by stmpy-1.cais.net (8.10.1/8.9.3) with ESMTP id e8U1JHT20921 for ; Fri, 29 Sep 2000 21:19:18 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from lojbab@lojban.org) Message-Id: <4.2.2.20000929211350.00af48b0@127.0.0.1> X-Sender: vir1036/pop.cais.com@127.0.0.1 X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.2 Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2000 21:15:23 -0400 To: lojban@egroups.com Subject: Re: [lojban] symmetrie of tenses In-Reply-To: <12.2eb9816.27069470@aol.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed From: "Bob LeChevalier (lojbab)" At 08:57 PM 09/29/2000 -0400, pycyn@aol.com wrote: >There are some important non-symmetrical features in the tense system -- in >Lojban as in the world ;(). >For example, 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. lojbab -- lojbab lojbab@lojban.org Bob LeChevalier, President, The Logical Language Group, Inc. 2904 Beau Lane, Fairfax VA 22031-1303 USA 703-385-0273 Artificial language Loglan/Lojban: http://www.lojban.org