Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

Re: Yemls Phonology (long)

From:Jeff Jones <jeffsjones@...>
Date:Tuesday, July 3, 2001, 13:00
On Tue, 3 Jul 2001 14:35:52 +0200, Christian Thalmann <cinga@...> wrote:

>Christophe Grandsire wrote: > >> It means that instead of marking absolute present, past or future, in >> subclauses present means simultaneity, past means anteriority and future >> means posteriority to the situation of the main clause. > >Ah... then I guess I've been using the term wrongly. In Obrenje, >relative tense means simultaneity, anteriority or posteriority with >respect to the timeframe established by the absolute tense. For >example, in "he was going to do", the absolute tense is past, but the >relative tense is posteriority. Similarly, in "he will have done", the >absolute tense is future, but the relative tense is anteriority.
That sounds like the same concept to me.
>As for that "Yemls" phonology, what are you talking about? I seem to >have missed the original post.
I hate to repost something that's in the archives, especially since I've already started making (minor) changes. I'll try sending it (the original) to you privately. Jeff
>-- Christian Thalmann