† † † Is this realistic?

Rob wrote:

<<Microsoft Encarta Online Dictionary defines "aorist" as "a verb tense used
to express a past action in an unqualified way, without specifying whether
that action was repeated, continuing, or completed or how long it lasted,
found especially in classical Greek."  So it appears that I used the wrong
term there.  I will use "punctual" instead.>>

Thanks!   So, in other words, it's like saying "past tense", but since that 
one's been so gummed up by different uses, there's just aorist.   Cool.

<<Using your words, let me add another formant _su_ meaning "progressive":

ki maka = I eat
ki makasu = I am eating
ki makana = I ate / I have eaten
ki makasuna ~ makanasu = I was eating>>

Looks good to me.   Of course, it might be interesting to see it with your 
words, instead of mine.   ;)   Sorry I sort of forced them onto your language.   
It just helps me to work with concrete examples.   So now that that's 
settled, is there a future tense?

-Dave

P.S.: I did something very similar with my creole.   Here's what that looks 
like:

yu = past tense
si = progressive
wa = future
ma = I
maka = eat

ma yu kama = I ate
ma wa kama = I will eat
ma kama = I eat
ma si kama = I'm eating
ma yu si kama = I was eating
ma wa si kama = I will be eating

There's also an irrealis marker.   But this raises a question: Is there a 
typologically natural order for a progressive and then a tense marker?   I got 
the impression that there was, but that there are exceptions.   (In other words, 
should it be "ma yu si kama" or "ma si yu kama"?)