tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Oct 01 12:15:02 1996
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
-taH (was: Re: KLBC)
- From: "William H. Martin" <[email protected]>
- Subject: -taH (was: Re: KLBC)
- Date: Tue, 1 Oct 1996 14:56:09 -0400 ()
- Priority: NORMAL
charghwI'vo':
Just to give a different slant, trying to state clearly my understanding
of {-taH}, {-lI'}, etc.:
When you use {-taH}, you mean that the point of focus is on the
continuing action. It does not mean that it never ends. For that, you'd
need some reinforcment, like the adverb {reH}. Without that
reinforcement, {-taH} just means that the action is continued within the
context of the tense setting in the sentence.
{-lI'} does not simply mean that the action will eventually end. It means
that the action has a clearly foreseeable ending, most commonly one
associated with a specific goal. The action has a goal and it is
progressing toward that specific goal.
An action with {-taH} can end. We just don't care about the ending when
we use {-taH}. Four thousand throats can be cut by a running man. Does
the man ever stop running? maSaHbe'. If the goal were specifically to cut
four thousand throats (not 3,999 and not 4,001), then {-lI'} should be
used. The focus is that if one continues to run, one can cut a whole lot
of throats.
The difference between {-taH} and {-lI'} is very similar to the
difference between {-pu'} and {-ta'}. I ought to know. I argued this
point with *ghuy'Do wa'* and lost. The goal is the thing, and it is less
a point of an existance of the goal as much as a focus on the goal. To
say, {vIqIppu'} does not imply that I did not hit him on purpose. It
merely states that I have hit him without revealing anything about
intent. Meanwhile, {vIqIpta'} makes it clear that the strike was
premeditated. There was a goal in striking him and I accomplished that
goal.
To say {jISoptaH} does not imply that I'll never stop eating or that I
have always been eating. It just means that within the time setting of
the sentence, I was continuously eating. I did not start or stop eating
within that time setting and in making the statement, I'm not concerned
about when I start or stop.
{jISoplI'} implies that while I am continuously eating, much the same as
in {jISoptaH}, my focus is on a specific intent for stopping that I eat.
I'm making clear that I intend to stop eating; that my attention is on
the ending of the process.
Examples:
You yell, {Ha'!}
If I respond, {jISoptaH!}, you can figure that I am not tempted by your
invitation and I'm telling you to leave me alone. Go without me.
If I respond, {jISoplI'}, you can figure that I probably want to join
you, but I want to finish eating first. I'll probably wolf down the last
handfulls -- umm, I mean, "bites" -- and join you in a slightly less
immediate fashion than I would if I didn't care about finishing my meal.
To grab an old example, if I go rock climbing, to acknowledge the
danger involved, I might say, {chaq jIpum}. If I lose my balance on the
edge of a cliff, I might yell, {jIpumchoH!}. Once I discover that I am
definitely committed to the action of plummeting, I'll look back up to
the cliff and yell, {jIpumtaH!}.
After a slow somersault, I might find myself viewing the distant, but
quickly approaching ground and yell, {jIpumlI'!}. I don't have to be
falling intentionally for the process itself to have a clearly
foreseeable goal.
Does this clarify things?
charghwI'