[tied] Re: future

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "m_iacomi <m_iacomi@...>"
<m_iacomi@...> wrote:

It's not that obvious. Which way is which on the time axis? I, and I
think most Westerners, think of time as a journey toward the future.
But I've read of cultures (sorry I can't remember which) that think
the future must lie behind, where you can't see it. What seems a
striking image to us, Marvell's
"But at my back I always hear
Time's winged chariot drawing near"
pretty much matches their common viewpoint.
Dan Milton

>
> Semantically, the notion of "future" is obviously correlated with
> changement/movement (on the time axis -> evolution). The future can
> be seen as a bunch of virtual events which will "come" into reality
> at some moment. Movement is often associated with future -- e.g. in
> English I may say "I'm _going_ to explain this point" (i.e. in near
> future), as well as the French counterpart "Je _vais_ expliquer ce
> point". The word <viitor> [derived from veni ('to come') + good ol'
> suffix -tor, as in pãzi ('to guard') > pãzitor ('guardian'),

suna

> ('to sound') > sunãtor ('which sounds' - noun), etc.] means

simply

> "which is coming". When applied to the time axis, "which is coming"
> is the future. The link is underlined also by other formulas like:
> "ceea ce va sã vinã" ('things which are going to come') which

are

> slightly different ways of expressing future in Romanian by means
> of the same verb.

> Marius Iacomi