| From: | Reilly Schlaier <schlaier@...> |
|---|---|
| Date: | Thursday, February 9, 2006, 18:53 |
quotey thinga mabobber - So it is practically impossible for Reilly's use of 'aorist' to be wrong :)> as long > as you explain what it is supposed to mean :)Yes, indeed - in fact, for such a 'Humpty-Dumpty' word as 'aorist' an explanation is a requirement. aorist in my lang = action that is occuring, started prior to the present and does not give any indication of ending