--- In Pali@yahoogroups.com, "John Kelly" <palistudent@...> wrote:

> I would just like to point out that the gerund is used to link
> together a sequence of actions that would more idiomatically be
> expressed in English with indicative verbs linked together

with "and".

Hi,

From a grammatical pt of view, and with respect, I would like to
assert, if I may, that the gerund (aka, the continuative) is used in
those examples with a main verb.

The action of the main verb in those examples should *follow* that of
the gerund.

An "and" in my idiolect, for what it is worth, greatly weakens the
explicit distinctiveness between the action of the main verb and that
of the gerund.

Also, by going in with this and-notion, the endings of the verbs may
be lost as in the first example where [A]gami occurs not [A]gamiMsu.

"Although the gerund "gantvaa" seems to express past tense, it really

> just means that the "going" happens before the later

verb, "bathing", though in actual fact both will happen in the future.

Going happens in the future? May I know where this notion is from,
i.e. gerund as future? Again, from my pt of view, the action of the
main verb *follows* that of the gerund. Why? They can bathe only
after having gone. The *fact* of there having gone is a necessary
part from my pt of view.

I appreciate your work!

These are just a couple of thoughts.

thank you