Hello Yong Peng,

After doing a bit more research, it does indeed seem that "present perfect"
can be written in a number of different ways in Pali including with aorist,
past participles (acting actively or passively), and perhaps the indicative
(present) and gerund(?) as I mentioned before. In this case, I wonder if
there is indeed a benefit to using the term "present perfect" at all in my
analyses. Might it be better to stick with simply analyzing them as:
aorist, gerund, indicative active or passive, etc.? I am interested to hear
your thoughts.

Metta,

Alan

----- Original Message -----
From: "Alan McClure" <alanmcclure3@...>
To: <Pali@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2005 8:04 AM
Subject: Re: [Pali] Re: Warder Exercises - [F008]


> Hello Yong Peng,
>
> Thank your for your suggestions. Could you specify for which examples you
> feel "ppr" or "present perfect" would be a good fit. My English grammar
> in
> this area is not strong and though I just looked up the term online, it
> does
> not clarify things much for me. As I understand it, present perfect can
> designate many things and so might sometimes be applicable to a few tenses
> in Pali. My guess is that sometimes gerund and sometimes indicative
> active
> might all be translated as present perfect? This is just a guess.
>
> Please advise.
>
> Metta,
>
> Alan
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Ong Yong Peng" <yongpeng.ong@...>
>> Dear Alan and friends,
>>
>> may I suggest the following abbreviations:
>>
>> ins: instrumental case
>> ppr: present perfect
>
>
>
>
>
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> [Homepage] http://www.tipitaka.net
> [Files] http://www.geocities.com/paligroup/
> [Send Message] pali@yahoogroups.com
> Paaliga.na - a community for Pali students
> Yahoo! Groups members can set their delivery options to daily digest or
> web only.
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>