Why are dreams reported in the imperfect tense in Latin (and other languages)? Wouldn't another past make more sense?
Perhaps another explanation is that dreams cannot really be considered "historical" since they are just psychological simulations.in "narrations" we use the "historical perfect", perfect indicative?
I find it a little curious that you highlighted (or rather bolded) the copula only (while also admitting that it feels just right), which to me makes more sense than some of the other imperfects there.EstQuodFulminelungo dixit:An example:
That sounds interesting. Could you elaborate on that?... or just indicative of the logical problems inherent in using identical/unmarked verb-forms to express things †that are quite different.
†I think Lithuanian has unique forms to deal with this, and Japanese, and possibly Georgian (about which I know virtually nothing), to name a few.
Why, certainly, mon ami.