Re: On the tense system

[Logical Language Group <lojbab@GREBYN.COM>]

The first two are close but not identical, since "ca" is aorist present
and makes no claims about "ba" or "pu".

___mi morsi ba'o lenu mi jmive___
I am dead in the aftermath of the event of my being alive

___mi morsi ca lenu mi ba'o jmive___
I am dead at the time of the event of my being in the aftermath of being alive

(the English may serve as an example of how I translate these ZAhO tenses to
myself, per another post, so as to be consistent between sumti tcita and
selbri tense)

The second does not exclude the possibility of
___mi morsi pu lenu mi ba'o jmive___
I am dead before the time of the event of my being in the aftermath of being
 alive

The first specifically puts you in the aftermath of that event of being alive.

Now
___mi morsi ba lenu mi jmive___
I am dead at a time after the event of my being alive



        ___mi morsi ca lenu mi ba jmive___
I am dead at the same time as the event of I will be alive

clearly don't mean the same thing.  I suspect that if you use "pu" as you
possibly intended, though:
 ___mi morsi ca lenu mi pu jmive
I am dead at the same time as the event of I was alive

is much closer, but still not identical, at least part
ially because of the aorist nature of the tenses.

lojbab