Re: A prioi vs. A posteriori ?

In a message dated Thu, 6 Feb 2003 17:10:04 -0600, Nik Taylor <
yonjuuni@...> parisen:

>Christophe Grandsire wrote:
>> As I said, the past tense of the auxiliaries has nearly taken a life of
its
>> own. But tense agreement still exists as far as I know (the past of "I do
it
>> because I can" is "I did it because I could". I doubt "I did it because I
can"
>> would have the same meaning, or would even be simply correct)
>
>"I did it because I can" is indeed ungramatical, at least for me. I
>wouldn't be surprised, tho, if there was a dialect somewhere that
>allowed that.
 I actually decided to keep each verb in Kankonian in its real tense.
Therefore, you say "Ad alhas wan azirethen az penkas abamas bolmas" (She
taught the class that starfish eat clams) instead of "Ad alhas wan azirethen
az penkas abamen bolmas" (She taught the class that starfish ate clams). If a
Kankonian person heard you use the "abamen" form, s/he'd think that starfish
no longer pry open clam shells, perhaps due to a major upset in the
ecosystem. Also suggestions take the future tense in Kankonian, as do any
sentences with the word "wafin" (to suggest).

Reply