tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sun Mar 26 19:48:29 2006
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
RE: double-checking
- From: Shane MiQogh <[email protected]>
- Subject: RE: double-checking
- Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2006 19:48:15 -0800 (PST)
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=Message-ID:Received:Date:From:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=Pg3g/+w3a6l6iRGb1ZqpchxidqNY/IZ4UjjweaYdMOnlUML/yOniQSni+51ixqlV59gLRsOnZ0Nu078X3nLfe1zWMy6yHWxOg7HVsOvzHrjmyZ8GcgaCf7Fzhc7Ve2iU3sRD8Vn9Zoej9T6433o3pspVqWyPQLYSVym7sP4bmEQ= ;
- In-reply-to: <20060327033001.FNYP15586.ibm69aec.bellsouth.net@no1>
If it was intended, reccomended that you say that there was rather than none at all... Technically one could say it means no intention, but is used for netural because of the rule that everyone is innocent until proven guitly. The Klingons (of which the language was based) might even beleive such, but this is irrelevant to the purpose of what is said... IF it was a known attempt use -ta', but if there wasn't, use -pu'.
DloraH <[email protected]> wrote: > In other words, use -ta' if there was intetion, and -pu' if
> there wasn't, but use one of the 2, not both, nor exclude both.
-pu' does NOT say there was or was not intent. It is neutral in that
regard. It simply says that the verb is completed.
-ta' also says that the verb is completed, but it also states that verb took
place intentionally.
DloraH
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. Make PC-to-Phone Calls to the US (and 30+ countries) for 2¢/min or less.