coi ro do
Here is the BPFK definition of the evidentiality particle {za'a}:
“Evidential. Used to express direct
observation or perception as the source of information or
idea. Said perception may be visual, but need not be. See also
zgana, lanli, the preface.”
I would like a clarification on the following point:
Does {za'a} imply that the event described by the sentence is
witnessed at the very time of utterance, or does it simply means
that the information comes from direct personal experience
(directly/sensorily witnessed), even if in remote past? Is {za'a
pu broda} nonsensical?
I interpret the official definition as not requiring the
perception to be concurrent with the utterance of the sentence,
but at least some other Lojbanists seem to interpret it the other
way. Maybe it is due to differing interpretations of the word
"direct" in the definition.
Which interpretation is correct?
Thank you in advance.
—Ilmen.
Does {za'a} imply that the event described by the sentence is witnessed at the very time of utterance, or does it simply means that the information comes from direct personal experience (directly/sensorily witnessed), even if in remote past? Is {za'a pu broda} nonsensical?
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lojban Beginners" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lojban-beginners+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/lojban-beginners.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.