From xod@sixgirls.org Tue Mar 13 11:39:59 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: xod@erika.sixgirls.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_4); 13 Mar 2001 19:39:59 -0000 Received: (qmail 41090 invoked from network); 13 Mar 2001 19:39:58 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 13 Mar 2001 19:39:58 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO erika.sixgirls.org) (209.208.150.50) by mta1 with SMTP; 13 Mar 2001 19:39:57 -0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by erika.sixgirls.org (8.11.2/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f2DJduc08970 for ; Tue, 13 Mar 2001 14:39:56 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2001 14:39:56 -0500 (EST) To: Subject: Re: [lojban] I almost caught the train In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII From: Invent Yourself On Tue, 13 Mar 2001, Jorge Llambias wrote: > > la xod cusku di'e > > >When I hear "I'm on the verge of fighting.", I never take that to mean > >the fight actually doesn't occur. Is that really what pu'o means? > > No, of course not. When you say {mi ca pu'o damba} there is no > telling whether the fighting will eventually take place or not, > all you are doing is describing the present situation. > > But pc's point was about the past inchoative. If you say > {mi pu pu'o damba}, "I was on the verge of fighting", you are > not telling whether or not the fighting eventually took place. > But now the likelihood is that it didn't, for if it did you > would be more likely to report that you fought, not that at > some point you were on the verge of fighting. Of course > context can change that: "All I can remember is that I was > on the verge of fighting, I can't remember anything after that". I can agree that pu'o doesn't imply anything about the event really taking place or not. If I pause my retelling of a story at the time right before a fight appears to break out, I don't see why my listeners should assume anything about whether or not the fight actually occurs. > >I thought that pu'o refers to an > >event that really occurs, otherwise, there would be no event having a > >before-period. > > No, the actual event need not occur, only the pre-event is > asserted to occur. I get it. > > >(You can't be before an event that never occurs, unless > >we're taking the trivial case, suggesting that all conceivable events > >could occur in the future. > > Right, but that is tense (pu, ca, ba), not aspect. If you say > {mi ba damba} and the fight does not take place, then the > statement was false. If you say {mi ca pu'o damba}, and you > really are on the verge of fighting, then the statement is > true whether or not the fighting eventually takes place. > The statement in this case is about the present (ca), not about > the future (ba). Hence: puki mi pu'o je banai snada tu'a le trene In the past, I was about to but didn't get the train. I almost got the train. ? ----- We do not like And if a cat those Rs and Ds, needed a hat? Who can't resist Free enterprise more subsidies. is there for that!