[YG Conlang Archives] > [ceqli group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
on 4/2/02 9:59 PM, Mike Wright at darwin@hidden.email wrote: > Rex May - Baloo wrote: >> >> Aspect. So far, Ceqli has the progressive aspect with particle 'gi' >> >> Go soma. I read. Go gi soma. I am reading. >> >> And it sort of has aspect with the composite tenses: >> >> Go pa ja. I went. >> Go pa pa ja. I had gone. >> Go fu pa ja. I will have gone. > > I don't think the same particle should be used both for past tense and > for perfect aspect. What if I want to express the perfect and ignore > the tense? (Which Mandarin speakers do quite frequently.) Don't be > thrown off by the fact that tense and aspect are so strongly > intertwined in English. Good point. The only thing that corresponds in English that I know of is the dialectal 'done', which seems to be tense-free at least in some instances. Anyhow, it can be present or past. I think Esperanto uses 'jam' (already) the same way, sometimes. So if Ceqli has a word meaning 'already' it can serve as the 'completion' aspect marker? > >> Go pa fu ja. I was going to go. >> Go fu fu ja. I will be going to go. > > "Going to" shows intention. It can just as well be replaced by > "planning to". I don't think it's a kind of aspect. (To tell the > truth, although "I will be going to go." feels correct, I can't really > tell you how it differs from "I am going to go." And I have no idea > how to say it in any other language.) I used 'going to' because it's the only way to say it in English that I know of. You can't say "I will will go." or "I was will go." The difference is: When the sun rises I will be going to get up. That is, I won't get up when it rises, but at that point my getting up will be in the future. You're right that 'going to' implies intention in English, but the 'Go fu fu ja' is not meant to in Ceqli. So what do we need to show what I'm trying to show with 'fu fu'? Esperanto has this system: Mo estos ironta. I will be going to go. Can Loglan do this too? I've forgotten. So, do we need a word for 'already' to be used for the completion aspect? If so, what form? And do we need a corresponding 'future-ish' aspect particle? > >> What other aspect is desirable? > > Mandarin has markers for progressive (duration) and perfect > (completion). There is also repetition, but I have no experience with > such a thing. I would guess that repetition can be handled well enough > using appropriate adverbial phrases. Yes. Important to remember that a lot of aspect is, as you say, intertwined with tense in English, and is expressed not grammatically, but semantically. Russian, for example, has aspect all over the place, usually with prefixes on verbs. -- >PLEASE NOTE MY NEW E-MAIL ADDRESS: rmay@hidden.email > Rex F. May (Baloo) > Daily cartoon at: http://www.cnsnews.com/cartoon/baloo.asp > Buy my book at: http://www.kiva.net/~jonabook/gdummy.htm > Language site at: http://www.geocities.com/ceqli/Uploadexp.htm >Discuss my auxiliary language at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/txeqli/