Re: Quenya aorist
- Lukas Novak wrote:
> This is one interpretation. Is not there another possible one, namelyto which Patrick Wynne responded:
> that the aorist is used in a sense not excluding temporal determination,
> but merely abstracting from it, not expressing it, leaving the job to
> the "luumesse" [snip]
> Certainly this is a _possible_ alternative interpretation, though IWhile I agree that 'on the hour' may not necessarily point to a single
> wouldn't say it's a _probable_ one, because -- again --it assumes
> that _lúmesse_ 'on the hour' somehow inherently points to a single
> incident in present time.
incident in time, the hour we are talking about is specified by an
attribute ('the hour of our meeting') which seems quite exact to me.
And even disregarding that, Novak's point still holds, that the aorist
is maybe used not to exclude temporal determination, but merely to not
give any, something not unheard of in real languages (Chinese for
instance almost never has to).