Re: ago24 & replies

[Goran Topic <topic@math.hr>]

> > A separate issue is whether {nu broda} can be an irrealis event, but I
> > suppose it has to, otherwise it will be very hard to deal with these
> > things.
>
> I find myself getting more and more confused as I try to reply to this.
> How do we verify the bridi {da nu broda}? Is it sufficient to examine
> the totality of time and see if lo nu broda ever occurred? Is occurring
> a necessary condition of nu-hood? (That is, is it the case that
> for all events there is some time such that the event occurs at that
> time?) If it is, then I don't think we can have irrealis events.
> If it is not, then we can have irrealis events, but claims about
> nu broda are truth-conditionally vacuous.
>
> Supposing we therefore said all events are realis. We could get at
> the meaning approximating to an irrealis event by using {duhu da nu broda}.
> Cumbersome as that may seem, it seems the most logical position to take.
> This would mean that all irrealis sumti, e.g. x1 of cumki, should in
> fact be duhu. ({lo nu broda kei cumki} would be true iff lo nu broda
> ever occurs.}

.i pe'i na go'i .i lu lonu broda li'u roroi ja'o pe'i velski lo fatci
.iku'i lu lenu broda li'u ka'e velski lo xanri

.i mu'a lu cumki fa ba'e le nu mi farlu li'u
.i mu'a lu mi viska ba'e lo nu loi verba cu kelci li'u

.i lenu lu lonu broda li'u ka'e velski lo xanri cu cumki ku'i lenu lo
selti'i be le na cmene te morji befi mi ku .e lo tcesauklu co jbena fo
lo mergu'e .i cusku lesedu'u lo xanri munje ku ji'a fatci .i tu'a lo
cmavo kujoi lo vanbi cu steci lo tolxanri lo fasnu .i cu'u la .uorf. lo
bangu be lo la xopis. merklu ku fauvla cu se klesi lo cinmi kuce lo
tolxanri poi jai cusku tu'a ke lo cabna kujoi lo purci ke'e pe la
ronban. ku'oce lo xanri poi jai cusku tu'a lo senva kuce lo balvi .i
rolu'a sego'i cu fatci ku'u la xopis.

.i glibanxelfanva zoi gy.

I don't think so. I conclude that {lonu broda} *should* express realis,
but {lenu broda} can be irrealis. E.g. Possible is an event which i
describe as my fall. BUT: I see that which really is an event of
children playing. Actually, {lonu broda} could describe irrealis if we
listened to a suggestion (I forgot who made it), which agrees with
worldview of some American Indians very much: irrealis is also a fact.
Sentence structure or context specify whether an event is real or
imaginary. E.g. the language of the Hopi tribe of American Indians (if I
read my Whorf correctly) has this verb category which parallels our
concept of tense, at least at the first glance. The three possibilities
are: nomic, which states relations that are always true, reportive,
which parallels our present and past, but really says that something has
come into this physical world, and expective, which includes our future,
but really says that it is still in the spiritual, and not yet realised,
so it includes also dreams, ideas, etc. All three are equally real to them.

English translation:

.gy.

co'o mi'e. goran. poi pacna lenu doi so'edo lenu do lojbo tcidu troci cu
purci lenu do glico tcidu kei lipiso'o .uu

--
Learn languages! The more langs you know, the more incomprehensible you can get
e'udoCILreleiBANgu.izo'ozo'onairoBANguteDJUnobedocubanRI'a.ailekadonaka'eSELjmi