TECH: Minor Semantic Change TENSE #3

TENSE #3

CURRENT LANGUAGE:

Forethought and afterthought tense/modal connection between sentences
have different meanings because they claim different things.
Specifically:

1)	mi klama le zarci .ibabo mi klama le zdani
	I go-to the store.  After-that I go-to the house.

makes three claims:  a) that I go to the store, b) that I go to the house,
c) that event b follows event a.

The corresponding afterthought form:

2)	bagi mi klama le zarci gi mi klama le zdani
	After I go-to the store, I go-to the house

is currently said to claim only that event 2 follows event 1, without claiming
that the events actually happen, i.e. "My going to the house is after my
going to the store."

PROPOSED CHANGE:

Make Example 2 claim what Example 1 claims:  both the two bridi and their
temporal connection.

RATIONALE:

It is idiosyncratic, not to say bizarre, to have a forethought form which has
different implications from the afterthought form.  The afterthought form has
been heavily used, especially in narration, and what it claims cannot now be
changed.  The forethought form is rare, and can easily be changed to
match the afterthought form.

As is done for the causal connections, the pure-connection claim can be
expressed by making the tense into the main selbri:

3)	le nu mi klama le zarci cu se balvi
		le nu mi klama le zdani
	The event-of my going-to the store has-as-its-future
		the event-of my going-to the house.

-- 
John Cowan		sharing account <lojbab@access.digex.net> for now
		e'osai ko sarji la lojban.