Re: tense and atemporality

la lojbab cusku di'e

> At 02:29 PM 8/8/03 -0700, Jorge "Llambías" wrote:
>
> >jbena x1 is born to x2 at time x3 [birthday] and place x4 [birthplace];
> >
> >What does {mi fi li 1966;10;17 ba'o jbena} mean? That the relationship
> >between "mi" and "1966;10;17" is no longer occurring?
> 
> Not having seen how you got here, so I'm probably putting by foot in my 
> mouth ...

We got here from a discussion about the difference (if any) between
everlasting events (ze'e) and atemporal relationships (no tense applies).

> It means that there was an event of mi being born at that time, and it is 
> the aftermath of that event. So yes, the event of your being born (which 
> presumably happened at that time) is no longer occurring.

But does the relationship still hold today, or does it no longer hold?
When did I stop jbena fi li 1966;?

> mi ba'o klama le zarci similarly means that we are in the aftermath of my 
> going to the store.

Right, so you are no longer in relationship klama with le zarci.
Am I no longer in relationship jbena with 1966?

> I'm not sure how I see that there should be a difference, merely because 
> one of the places is a time.

I'm trying to figure out whether it is _right now_ the case
that {mi jbena fi li 1966;}, or whether it is nonsense to
say that {mi jbena fi li 1966;} is true at some time or another.
Isn't it just an atemporal relationship between {mi} and {li 1966;}?

mu'o mi'e xorxes 



__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.
http://search.yahoo.com