pne scribeva:esra scribeva:Probably I found one typo mistake inside original work:
1a.) Vorgegenwart/ perfecto: "io ha amante" (letter "-n-" were missing)
Should be "io ha amate" (I have loved), no -n-.
"amante" is "loving", and "I have loving" makes no sense.
Thanks a lot. Originaly Schild wrote it "io ha amate" (without "-n-"). So, inside digitized version its corrected now back to original state.
pne scribeva:esra scribeva:About some aspects I'm not sure. According author Schild the Mittelwort(1)
"participle" in English. (In German, the Latinesque word is "Partizip".)
Yes, I cloudy remember about these Partizip I, Partizip II ones. Interlingua Grammar and Method 2nd Edition (Mulaik) has chapter with good explanations for "not-that-deep-linguists". (Page 79 verbs) Even if sometimes it goes lot of into detail, he very well describes that matter for target group of not-that-deep-linguists.
pne scribeva:esra scribeva:of futuro perfecte and Mittelwort(2) of conditional perfecte are marked up same like Mittelwort of passato. Does the rule e-2-i (i.e. vider to vidite) applies, too? Is that correct?
Yes, it's the same form for each -- like in English or German or French etc.
"Ich werde gehört, ich werde gehört haben, ich würde gehört haben" all have the same form "gehört"; it's the past participle (or whatever you want to call it).
Schild sometimes uses German-ized terms i.e.
Partizip = Mittelwort
Pronom = Fürwort
Verb = Zeitwort
Adjektiv = Eigenschaftswort
Der Artikel = Geschlechtswort
??? = Hauptwort i.e. tabulo, soror
Präpositionen = Verhältniswörter
??? = Grundform i.e. amar
??? = Verbalstamm i.e. ama
Imperativ = Befehlsform
Conditional I, II = Gegenwart der Bedingungsform; zweite Bedingungsform
perfecto = Vorgegenwart
plus-quam-perfecto = Vorvergangenheit
Konjugation = einfache und zusammengesetze Zeiten
Okay.pne scribeva:So the same stem changes apply in each case.