Well, for what it's worth, I personally would not understand "I went to the
chemist ... after ... I went to the post office", as anything other than "I
went to the chemist after I went to the post office", in other words, "I
went to the post office, and then went to the chemist". Maybe the usage is
different in another region (I'm from the Pacific Northwest region of the
US), but if I wanted to say I went to the chemist first, I would definitely
say "afterwards" or "then", not "after" (I also suspect that "chemist" here
refers to what I would call a pharmacist, but that's beside the point).
On Wed, Jul 5, 2017 at 11:36 PM, stewart fraser <[log in to unmask]>
> Does anybody here know Arabic. In Arabic, ba9d means “after” and ba9dain
> means “afterwards” … I would like to know the etymology of the -“ain” in
> ba9dain (I presume that if you go back far enough ba9d will mean “behind”).
> I find English to be a bit weird when it comes to “after” and
> “afterwards”. Well after is a preposition … as in “after I went to the
> chemist, I went to the post office”. But it can also be a conjunction … as
> in “I went to the chemist … after … I went to the post office”
> Now it’s form as a conjunction can either be “afterwards” or “after that”
> or just “after” with a small pause after it. It seems to me that “this
> small pause” is acting as anaphora … it is referring back to “I went to the
> Note that is this small pause disappeard (or maybe I should say if the
> intonation changed) you would have “I went to the chemist after I went to
> the post office” which is the exact opposite to “I went to the chemist …
> after … I went to the post office” (as many people use comma’s because they
> look nice, rather than faithfully reflecting pauses (or potential pauses)
> in speech … this must cause havoc with automatic translating programs)
> In my conlang I would like to make the anaphora element explicit rather
> than relying on pauses.
> If English used the form “afterwards” as a conjunction exclusively I would
> like it better (more logical). I read that -“wards” originally came from
> *wer, P.I.E. for “to turn”. I don’t really see what lead to its
> grammaticization thu’. Also I don’t really see what function it is
> performing (or did perform at one time). Anybody got any ideas ?
> … Stewart Fraser