[YG Conlang Archives] > [engelang group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 12:13 AM, Mike S. <maikxlx@gmail.com> wrote: > > I think that the two most basic aspects that we'll want to mark are > perfective and imperfective, but I don't know what L brivla express them (I > checked your BPFK aspect section, and it's clear that "ca'o" is the right > cmavo for imperfective). I agree that "continuous" is not right. I guess > we can just make up some new predicates if L lacks them. Yes, it's better to do that. > As far as L "ba'o", I am not sure that is a perfective marker. I think > that's a perfect marker, or maybe it covers both. You're right, it's perfect rather than perfective (I just corrected that on the BPFK page). Perfective is "co'i", although it is rarely used, probably because we take the perfective aspect as default. > There seems to be some sort of connection between the > imperfective/perfective distinction and mass/count distinction. I wonder if > we can get away with "in some one [whole/complete] event" for the perfective > aspect, and "in some event-mass" for the imperfective. I can't think of > anything that really feels right though. There's a connection between the mass/count distinction of the direct object and the imperfective/perfective aspect, but I don't know whether it applies to a mass/count distinction of the event. co ma'a xrxe