From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Message-Id: <5.1.1.6.0.20030926112038.00aba198@pop.monitorbm.co.nz>
To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu
From: Andrew Simmons <andrew.simmons@monitorbm.co.nz>
Subject: Re: [9fans] ISP filtering - update
In-Reply-To: <3F737603.8040709@acm.org>
References: <20030925231952.C7137@edinburgh.cisco.com>
 <029b01c383ab$855089c0$b9844051@insultant.net>
 <fd8e0bd23fec289a330752f35336ee41@plan9.bell-labs.com>
 <029b01c383ab$855089c0$b9844051@insultant.net>
 <20030925223637.D26720@edinburgh.cisco.com>
 <5.1.1.6.0.20030926094929.03366d70@pop.monitorbm.co.nz>
 <20030925231952.C7137@edinburgh.cisco.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2003 11:21:40 +1200
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 4dd31da6-eacc-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025

At 16:10 25/09/2003 -0700, you wrote:

>>That's the point.  Latin has single word infinitives,  English doesn't.
>
>Latin actually has some two-worded infinitives; for example,
>"portaturus esse" -- "to be about to carry" (future infinitive),
>where the present infinitive is "portare." So, a Latin infinitive
>could be "split," if "to split" is to insert something between the
>first and second words.
>
>"portatus esse" may be the perfect passive infinitive -- I may
>be mistaken.

That's the trouble with this list. No matter what topic I choose to spout
ill-informed drivel on, there's always some one who knows what they're
talking about.