tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Feb 18 15:57:11 1998
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: nuqneH [past tense]
- From: "Robyn Stewart" <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: nuqneH [past tense]
- Date: Wed, 18 Feb 1998 15:57:56 PST
- Organization: NLK Consultants, Inc.
- Priority: normal
Princess Leia wrote:
> nuqneH,
>
> I'm curious, is there a way to change verbs into the past tense and
> past participe in Klingon? Say for example: *eat*
ta'Hom,
1. Klingon does not have any modifications to the verb for past or
future tense. {jISop} could mean "I eat" "I ate" or "I will eat."
You need context to tell the difference.
wa'Hu' jISop. - I ate yesterday.
wa'leS jISop - I will eat tomorrow.
That's it for tense.
2. The closest thing Klingon has to participles are forms of
the verb with aspect suffixes. These are also tense-independent, so
the same verb could be past, present or future tense. Read about
aspect suffixes in the section of the verbs chapter about type 7 verb
suffixes.
{-lI'}
continuous aspect, progress towards a goal
nIQ vISoplI' - "I was eating breakfast" or "I am eating breakfast" or
"I will be eating breakfast."
{-pu'}
perfective aspect, not necessarily deliberately undertaken action
This suffix implies that the action to which it is attached is
already completed in the time context of the sentence.
DaHjaH vagh vatlh rep jISop. - "I ate at five am today."
The action is in the past, but you don't use perfective because in
the time context of the sentence (five am today) the eating was not
yet complete.
DaHjaj jav vatlh rep jISoppu' - "I had eaten at six am today." (or,
if the sentence was said before six am: "I will have eaten at six am
today.") The point is, that at the time context of the sentence (not
necessarily when the sentence was said, rather when it is >set<), the
eating is complete.
A very very common mistake is to use perfective aspect to try to
indicate past tense. Don't. If it is vital that your audience
understand that the action took place in the past, say when it
happened.
Grammatically, any Klingon sentence can be interpreted as past,
present or future. Often context allows you to discard one or more
of the interpretations. {bIHegh} is unlikely to be anything but
future tense, unless you are talking to a corpse or a ghost. If you
were talking to someone in the present tense, telling them they were
actually dying now, you would use the continuous aspect. {bIHeghlI'}
"you are dying."
See TKD for {-ta'} and {-taH}, aspect suffixes I haven't mentioned
here.
- Qov