tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Thu Oct 31 13:41:25 1996
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
RE: KLBC - just "jatlh" - why?
- From: "David Trimboli" <[email protected]>
- Subject: RE: KLBC - just "jatlh" - why?
- Date: Thu, 31 Oct 96 05:22:33 UT
jatlh Alan Weiner:
> Congratulations SuStel on your promotion to pabpo'!
qatlho'!
Thanks!
> Now to inundate you with BG questions...
yIruch!
Go for it! (Or, more exactly, "do it!")
> You responded to Adrian's post, starting with:
> jatlh Adrian K (HurghwI'):
> I took this to be the Klingon-email equivalent of:
> Adrian K (HurghwI') wrote:
>
> Now, I know this is a *real* beginner's question, but I don't follow
> why it's just "jatlh" - "speak"
> I follow there's no tense in tlhIngan Hol (which makes me tense -
> *sorry*!) but shouldn't it have a suffix indicating that Adrian has
> completed the speaking - jatlhpu' ? Why does it not?
Well, he *has* completed it, but that information is not really very relevant.
The difference is between "He says" and "He has said." I could put it there,
but what would be the point? Just because it's in the past doesn't mean that
it's completion is relevant.
Besides, when I was posting via AOL, I made use of the date and time which
were provided. Since this provided the time context, I couldn't use {-pu'} or
{-ta'}. Saying {31 October 1996 jatlhpu' Alan} in response to your letter of
31 October would mean that you had already sent the letter as of that date,
which would not be true. So, the aspect marker (Type 7 suffix) is not very
useful here.
SuStel
Stardate 96832.9