tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Aug 17 08:14:25 1998
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: DuSaQqoqvetlh vIpar
- From: Robyn Stewart <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: DuSaQqoqvetlh vIpar
- Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1998 08:12:36 -0700 (PDT)
---Dawut *Dave* <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> DuSaQ muvta' loDnI'wI' je.
> >> My brother joined the school too.
> >
> >I probably wouldn't have used perfective here, unless my brother had
> >been done joining the school before I joined. You know that /DuSaQ
> >muv je loDnalwI'/ means "my brother joined the school, too," right?
>
> HISlaH. I understand that {muv} is: join/joined/will join.
> I used the type 7 suffix, {-ta'} "accomplished, done" to convey that
his
> joining the school is intentionally accomplished as the sentence is
> being "said." Also a type 7, the {-pu') suffix is perfective.
Both /-pu'/ and /-ta'/ are perfective. Just as there is no way the
English verb distinguishes deliberate from non-deliberate in any
aspect, there is no way to show it in Klingon if you are not using an
aspect suffix. Perfective does not indicate the completion/continuity
of the action as the sentence is SAID, rather at the time the sentence
is SET. Put it this way: if you said <DuSaQ muvta' loDnI'wI'> and I
asked <ghorgh?> What would you answer? If your answer would be the
time he joined the school, then don't use perfective. If your answer
would be /DaH/ perfective would work, but the answer would be odd
since he has since also quit. If your answer would be some time
between his joining and now, then perfective would be appropriate, but
I would wonder why you chose that time to set your sentence.
If and when perfective is appropriate, choose between /-pu'/ and
/-ta'/. If perfective is not appropriate and you wish to stress that
he joined deliberately, then use the word /chIch/.
> >/ma-/ - we-no object
> >/wI-/ - we-3rd person singular object
> >/DI-/ - we-3rd person plural object
>
> Agreed. These should be: {DuSaQvetlhDaq juppu' chu' DIghompu'} and
> {'ach DuSaQvetlhDaq pagh wI'ghojpu'}.
/wIghompu'/ - no verb prefix ends in /'/.
> I used {ma-} in the first sentence completely by mistake (it was a
> complete mistake to use it), but the second use was a case of
> operational illogic. Because I used {pagh} "nothing", that became the
> object, which would then need {wI-}. For {ma-} to be correct, I'd
have
> to take out the object, {pagh}, for something like {DuSaQvetlhDaq
> maghojbe'}. Right?
Right.
> >> DuSaQqoqvetlhDaq vIcheghqa'Qo'.
> >> I won't return to that so-called school again.
> >
> >With /-Daq/ on the location the verb of motion takes a no-object
> >prefix. /jIchegh/.
>
> I didn't remember that. Can you point me to a TKD section?
> I don't see that under the description of {-Daq) in 3.3.5.
> I'll read that section a few more times anyway.
It is in 3.3.5, although not in those words. Section 3.3.5 tells you
indirectly that a noun in /Daq-/ is not the object of the verb. You
know that prefixes indicate objects.
Canon: /tachDaq maghom/ and /wa' Dol nIvDaq matay'DI' maQap/
> >> tlhIngan Hol vIHaDmeH poH vIghaj, DuSaQqoqvetlh vIbupmo'.
> >> Because I quit that school, I'll have time to study the Klingon
> >> language.
> >
> >"have time" may be an idiom that can't be translated literally into
> >Klingon.
>
> I do know that the English "have time" isn't the best translation. "I
> possess a period of time" is more what I was attempting. What I
> originally wanted to express was that I "have more time" to study.
Any
> thoughts on "more"?
How about: /ghur jIHaDmeH poH/
"The period of time for my studying will increase."
Editors of English will fault you for writing "I have more time"
without the other half of the comparative.
> tlhIngan Hol HaD vItIv.
> "I enjoy the study of the Klingon language."
Doing this to bait me? /HaD/ isn't a noun, best we know.
> tlhIngan Hol vIHaD 'e' vItIv.
> "I enjoy studying the Klingon language."
maj.
==
Qov - Beginners' Grammarian
_________________________________________________________
DO YOU YAHOO!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com