[YG Conlang Archives] > [jboske group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >


[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

Re: [jboske] ta'e/na'o



In a message dated 10/25/2002 6:08:10 PM Central Daylight Time, jjllambias@hidden.email writes:

<<
What is the difference between {ta'e}, "habitually" and
{na'o}, "typically".

>>
The version I was playing with, tentatively, would make "habitually" apply directly to individuals (the only things that can have habits, I suppose) and "typically" to masses.  So, if enough people have a certain habit, then it will be typical over the mass of people -- though I don't think that the converse is true, since the typical behavior of a mass may be carried out by different members on different occasions.  Apply "habitual" to a mass would, I suppose, be a second order claim: that that habit was typical.  Applying "typical" to an individual is a bit clearer: take an individual as a mass of (successive) worm slices and then do the standard "typical" analysis on that mass.  (Note: I am of half a dozen minds about what the standard "typical" analysis is, but {rau} seems to turn up in most of them).  One crucial point (I think, again): habits can be had that are not exercised (this is, I think, different from the lionless lion tamer), but typicals are always occurrent. (That actually sounds oess certain when said out loud than it did in my head, but I still think there is a grain os some significant difference there.)