Re: sera'aku GEN: almost-PROPOSAL: intervals

[Logical Language Group <lojbab@ACCESS.DIGEX.NET>]

>>> > >mi klama la glazgov. puza lo nanca belipimu
>
>> I still read this as  a medium time before some 6 month period.  I am sorry,
>> but that is the way I learned the language, and this proposal changes it
>> significantly.
>
>I think that that is "mi klama la glazgov. pulenu nanca belipimu zaku".
>Surely the event should immediately follow PU and the distance immediately
>follow ZA.

Not sure whether you intend this, but the zaku is within the lenu clause -
again a terminator may be needed.

But to answer your question, yes the above is an alternate phrasing that I
would interpret the same way, given a ku before the za, BUT there is
nothing that says that the presence of a "za" right after the pu, changes
the interpretation of what follows the pu.  The "za" is modifying the pu,
and not talking about the tagged sumti directly.  It is possible to have
complex tense-tagss that have multiple zi/za/zu/ze'i/ze'a/ze'u in them,
and you do not want to rely on whichever the tense grammar makes to fall in
final position to be the determining factor in deciding what specifically is
the relationship of the sumti to everything else.  If the grammar had been
such that *"zapu" meant what "puza" means as a tag, people would not be
assuming that the "za" instead of the "pu" governed the sumti, but the
"za" in final position is an artifact of the tense grammar and NOT an
indication of greater relevance to the sumti.

lojbab