Re: Re[2]: [tied] Re: Ablaut, hi-conjugation, stress alternation, e

----- Original Message -----

From: Patrick Ryan

To: cybalist@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Monday, December 25, 2006 10:56 PM

Subject: Re: Re[2]: [tied] Re: Ablaut, hi-conjugation, stress alternation, etc

 

----- Original Message -----

From: Brian M. Scott

To: Patrick Ryan

Sent: Monday, December 25, 2006 9:59 PM

Subject: Re[2]: [tied] Re: Ablaut, hi-conjugation, stress alternation, etc

 <snip>

 

This discussion started off when I translated <proc^itaju> as 'I shall read through' and Piotr denied the necessity of 'through' for the translation.

1. I maintain that, without a specified context, <proc^itaju> must be translated as 'I shall read through'  in order to unambiguously indicate its _perfective_ nature.

2. 'I shall read through'  may be further expanded to 'I shall be reading through' if one wishes to specify durative, or 'I shall have read through' to specify punctual.

3. 'I shall read', without a specified context, translates only <budu c^itat>, and is _imperfective_.

4. 'I shall be reading' specifies durative; 'I shall have read' specifies punctual.

 

Patrick

***