Re: Bowtudgelean

Carl Banks wrote:
> Jeffrey Jones wrote:
>> On Sun, 27 Apr 2008 13:06:11 -0400, Carl Banks
>> <conlang@...> wrote:
[snip]
>
>>> Indicated: a limiting adjective (or phrase) follows
>>
>> This seems to be purely a matter of morphosyntax, with no pragmatic component.
>
> Whatever--it's still a distinct state.  And it does imply definiteness.
Dismissing Jeffrey's observation with 'whatever' does not IMO help. He
has not written that it's not a 'state' in your language & obviously
adding a limiting adjective (or adjective phrase) does make the noun
more definite. But as far as I can understand it, Jeffrey's observation
still holds true: "This seems to be purely a matter of morphosyntax,
with no pragmatic component."

>>> Past: the thing happened in the past
>>> Future: the thing happened in the future
>>
>> These seem to be tenses and independent of the noun being definite.
>
> No, they're not tenses.  These can be compared to demonstratives in
> time.  These states are used mostly for events.  If I were to ask you,
> "How was the party?" I would use past state, because the thing that
> identifies the party was that it occurred in the past.  These states are
> often used when constrasting to the present.
Sorry for appearing to be a bit simple, but if
(a) they can be compared to demonstratives in _time_, and
(b) the 'past state' identifies that something occurred in the past, and
(c) these state are often used when contrasting with the present -
how are the not tenses?

Tense:
"The grammatical category which correlates most directly with
distinctions of time." [Trask]

Another puzzling matter - Is it not possible that I may want to contrast
something with the present _and_ also limit it by an adjective [phrase].
If, for example, you use the 'past state' for "How was the party?", what
stare is used for "How was the party over at Cindy's?", as opposed to
the party over at Fred's?

Just curious.

--
Ray
==================================
http://www.carolandray.plus.com
==================================
Frustra fit per plura quod potest
fieri per pauciora.
[William of Ockham]

Reply