tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Apr 05 09:11:53 1995
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: KLBC
yoDtargh has accomplished a fine first post as Beginners'
Grammarian. Just a comment. The rest is deleted because I
completely agree with it.
According to R.B Franklin:
>
>
> On Tue, 4 Apr 1995, Niekel CN wrote:
...
> > De'wI' Qich vItu'be'lI'
and yoDtargh replied:
> Minor typo - it's {QIch}.
> You don't want to use the {-lI'} suffix here. It could imply that not
> finding the computer sounds is the outcome you are proceeding towards.
> I would say {wej De'wI' QIch vItu'} or {De'wI' QIch vItu'be'pu'}.
While I agree with the solutions as fine sentences, I'm not
sure the original was all that mistaken. I understand your
interpretation of {-lI'}, though I tend to interpret it to mean
that he is currently in the state of not finding the computer's
speech (sounds) (like {-taH}), but (unlike {-taH}) foresees an
end to this state. He is progressing towards an end to the
state of not finding. If I say {jIqetlI'}, I am not saying that
I am progressing toward the state of running. I am saying that
I am involved in the state of running, progressing toward the
completion of that process. I am progressing toward the state
of {jIqetta'} or perhaps {jIqetpu'} - since Krankor long ago
established that {-lI'} can be used in processes that do not
involve goals, like falling rocks, which, without conscious
intent, will clearly cease to fall once the ground establishes
the rock's sudden decelleration. pumlI' nagh. <CRASH!> pumpu'
nagh.
While I think the original is therefore not mistaken, I also
believe that your first suggestion is an improvement. This is
what the word {wej} [as adverbial] was built for. Meanwhile, I
think you were mistaken in your second suggestion:
{De'wI' QIch vItu'be'pu'}
Here you are saying that you have completed the act of not
finding, which I think is somewhat different from not
completing the act of finding. I think {vItu'pu'be'} would have
been a better choice. When a guard is bribed to avoid seeing
someone as they pass, he might appropriately say {vItu'be'pu'}
or even {vItu'be'ta'}, but if he sincerely did not notice
anyone on a normal shift, he would tend to say {vItu'pu'be'}.
If he sincerely sought and did not find, he would say
{vItu'ta'be'}.
...
> yoDtargh
charghwI'
--
\___
o_/ \
<\__,\
"> | Get a grip.
` |