Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

change the gloss for {ba'o}, change the Chnese example with {ba'o} #325

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: docbook-prince
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

lagleki
Copy link
Contributor

@lagleki lagleki commented Jul 2, 2019

There is a strong trend in Lojbanistan to perceive {ba'o} as retrospective (linguistic and well-known terminology), {mo'u} as telicity aspect and {co'i} as perfective aspect (again in linguistic termonology).

Therefore, the gloss "perfective" for {ba'o} is changed to "retrospective" to avoid confusion.

The Chinese particle "le" is closer to {co'i} (perfective) rather than {ba'o}. Therefore, the translation of "zhe xiaoxi wo zhidao le" is changed to le nuzba zo'u mi co'i djuno} replacing {ba'o} with {co'i}.
Also Chinese simplified characters are added for this Chinese example.

@lagleki lagleki added this to the CLL 1.3 milestone Jul 2, 2019
@lagleki
Copy link
Contributor Author

lagleki commented Feb 22, 2021

mi ba'o djunomi co'i djuno ⸨Doesn't that latter imply that the knowing is no longer true?⸩

I believe that

  1. in {mi ba'o djuno} implies that I'm in the aftermath of knowing
  2. {mi co'i djuno} implies that all the stages (co'a, ca'o, mo'u) happen consecutively.

A better translation would probably be {mi ca'o/ca'a djuno}

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant