tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Feb 23 12:24:16 1998
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: nuqneH [past tense]
- From: "Robyn Stewart" <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: nuqneH [past tense]
- Date: Mon, 23 Feb 1998 12:23:23 PST
- Organization: NLK Consultants, Inc.
- Priority: normal
ghunchu'wI'
>ja' Qermaq:
>> Interesting to see the sequence... before it is an issue,
>> <bIHegh>. When the death is inevitable, but hasn't actually
>> begun to occur, <bIHeghchoH>. As the death starts, <bIHeghlI'>.
>> After the moment of death, <bIHeghpu'>. Later, after the fact,
>> <bIHegh> again.
I read this and saw no problem with saying any of the suggested words
at the suggested times, but ghunchu'wI' is quite right, if you think
the suffixes you have chosen imply times in the past or future, they
do not.
> I don't see your point. All of these can be used for either
> something that happened in the past, something that is happening
> now, or something that will happen in the future. I can accurately
> say to any mortal being {bIHeghpu'}, for example.
I try to translate examples almost randomly with respect to tense to
underscore that Klingon has no tense.
bIHegh - you died, you die, you will die
bIHeghchoH - you began to die, you begin to die, you will begin to
die
bIHeghlI' - you were dying, you are dying, you will be dying
bIHeghpu' - you had died, you have died, you will have died
So for one event you could say ther eis a sequence through -choH,
-lI' and -pu', but the unsuffixed verb can apply to any time in the
process.
A student explaining the instructions for a test.
maghItlhchoHpa', wIlaDnIS. ra'DI' ghojmoH, wIlaDchoH. nutoghtaHvIS
ghojmoH boQwI', wIlaDlI'. wIlaDchu'pu'DI' maghItlhchoHlaH.
Now, tell me: is this student explaining the instructions BEFORE the
test, DURING the test, or AFTER the test? How do you know?
- Qov