On Fri, 30 Mar 2007 16:55:15 -0700, Donald J. HARLOW <[log in to unmask]> wrote: >There's one fundamental problem with all this, >Rex. While the -AS, -IS and -OS endings all show >*actions*, the participial suffixes show >something quite different -- *states*. "dormasa" >would be a perfectly legitimate word in classical >Esperanto (we already occasionally use terms like >"isa" and "osa" -- see the ads for the 2002 ELNA >Congress in Sacramento), but it wouldn't mean quite the same as "dormanta". So I've awkwardly reinvented the wheel yet again? Obviously, I want to know more about this, as I've never encountered such usage — I've searched, but can't find the ad you're referring to. > >("kisatu" is also a legitimate word, though it >would be rarely used, and means something like "u >kisate" rather than "estu kisata". "kisu" is of >course highly legitimate and, one supposes, >commonly used in certain circles; but again it >doesn't mean quite the same as "kisantu".) > >I am dubious about the esthetic value of the -T >termination in "frapat". See Gaston Waringhien's >snarls of distaste about a piece of Occi poetry >which he quotes in "Lingvo kaj vivo" and which >has a number of such terminating clicks. >Actually, you can't always hear the -T ending, >which can easily turn into a glottal stop, not a >phonological staple of Esperanto or any other IAL >wannabe that I can think of, including Ie and Ia, >where the -T ending can appear (I believe). > Oh, me, too. Don't like the -t ending all that much. I was just trying to work within what's already there. Probably it's taking things too far to have a whole set of passive endings, not least because any letter I can think of to base it on is busy doing something else or is, like you say, unesthetic by Eo standards. And what you say about the present/timeless thing is very interesting. It does jibe with a lot of other languages that way, of course, and seems offhand never to lead to ambiguity. OTOH, is "mi estas dormanta" ambiguous? I take it as signifying present tense in two ways, simply because all other Vs Vnta forms definitely mean something else, and the default is, thus, the present tense. You say: "Note: "li dormes" is unnecessary because "li dormas" already specifies only that the person is sleeping -- no beginning or end point is specified (this is more apparent in the participle, "dormanta", which also specifies no beginning or end of the sleep period -- "La Dormanta Belulino ... dormas, de kiam ni ne scias, gxis kiam ni ne scias, almenaux se ne alvenos princo por kisveki sxin"). So, could you say: -anta = anytime at all -inta = anytime before now -onta = anytime after now And, then, it seems that the 'present' endings are actually very context-based. I mean, the bare sentence "Li dormas" is indeed ambiguous when taken out of context. It could mean different things. Kion Johano faras nun? — Li dormas. Kiel Johano uzas cx tiun liton? — Li dormas. I imagine all this has be exhaustively discussed somewhere, but I've never encountered it that I remember. And i very much would like to see examples of -asa -isa -osa usage. I'm curious about how it's thought of as differing from the nta endings.