Re: future

>The question here is how are we able to say "ignorance of one's
>language"?

That's what it is!

>Which are the criteria? The literary language? The language
>of the elite? I don't know if this is a good explanation .

If you don't know, then listen to someone who knows.
Marius merely pointed out many people use forms that
are simply wrong. And they are wrong. That someone has
the... social status of a peasant does not makes him/her
a Moses-like prophet and his/her stammering milestones
in linguistics. (Ist das die Lach- und Schiessgesellschaft? :)

>About the regularity you see that this is pretty regular:
>Dusese, fusese, intorsese, trasese, mulsese but too the forms "duse,
>fuse, intoarse ( see dyphtongation here), trase, mulse). Actualy

<shucks> You still don't know how these tenses look like and how
they are to be applied. (I posted the endings several times. To
no avail? Just try: "repetitio mater studiorum __est__".)

>verbs which makes the participium in "s" are conjugated regular in this
>way. I am not sure if there are some exceptions , I never looked for.

Do you mean participles such as "zis, dres, tras, dus, trimes/trimis, pus,
spus, expus"? If so, what do you wish to say in connection with the
Romanian morphemes "a fi, fire, fui, fost"? Where is the participle
-s?!

>There is no derivative with "fost", the word
>is just used with auxiliar " to have" like in english: have been = am
>fost. The word remains always in this form since the one who make the
>conjugation is the auxiliar one

(Oh boy, you dare give such an "explanation" to cybalist's linguists?
Ich fasse es nicht! :)

>am fost, ai fost, a fost, am fost, atsi fost, au fost).

Si tacuisses, philosophus mansisses. :)

>BTW, is the form "este" in other Romance languages too?

Qu'est ce que c'est? [Kesskössee -- no lake in the Alps] :-)

>Alex

g