tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Apr 14 07:50:30 1998
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: KLBC:Re: My first try at tlhIngan Hol KLBC
- From: Terrence Donnelly <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: KLBC:Re: My first try at tlhIngan Hol KLBC
- Date: Tue, 14 Apr 1998 09:49:10 -0500
At 04:32 PM 4/13/98 -0700, Qov wrote:
>At 02:24 98-04-13 -0700, Englebert wrote:
[...]
>You have something stuck in your head that tells you to use the perfective
>for anything completed in the past. If the point of the verb is on the
>completion, be it past, present or future completion, use the perfective.
>If the point is the action of the verb, be that action in the past present
>or future, don't use the perfective.
>
[..]
>}> }*Maassluis* jIDabpu'.
>}>
>}> {M. vIDab} "I lived in M." The place inhabited is the object of {Dab}. No
>}> perfective.
>}
>}No perfective because from the context (I moved to Amsterdam) it is
>}clear that I don't live in M. anymore?
>
>No perfective because the tense you want is simple past.
>
>{M. vIDab.} "I live in M., I lived in M., I will live in M."
>{M. vIDabpu'} "I had lived in M., I have lived in M., I will have lived in M.}
>
A rule of thumb I sometimes use: Put yourself into the time you are
describing (eg., if you are describing past events, imagine that you are
in that same past time, too.) Then, when you describe an event related to
that past time, if you can insert the word "already" into your phrase, it's
probably perfective.
(M. vIDabpu') "I had _already_ lived in M.", etc.
-- ter'eS
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Corridor/2711