tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Dec 04 13:42:37 2007
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: usage of type-7 aspect suffix {-pu}
Steven Boozer wrote:
> Qang qu'wI:
>>> poSpu' HoD mInDu'
>
> David:
>> The sentence does not indicate any time context, so we don't know
>> what's "current." All we know is that the sentence refers to the
>> the captain's eye-opening being complete.
>
> Except that {poS} "be open, opened" is not an action verb, but a
> quality (stative verb). Okrand on {-pu'} "perfective":
>
> This suffix indicates that AN ACTION IS COMPLETED. It is often
> translated by the English present perfect ("have done something").
> [TKD 41, emphasis added]
But he also says about {-taH} "continuous", "This suffix indicates that
an action is ongoing." Yet there are verbs of quality that take {-taH}:
Hem tlhIngan Segh 'ej maHemtaH 'e' wIHech. (TKW p. 13)
(That's just the first one I found. I'll bet there are more.)
Restricting verb suffixes based on the word "action" in the TKD
explanation isn't right.
> I could find NO examples of {-pu'} on a simple quality.
I agree that it's possible that quality verbs can't take {-pu'} or
{-ta'}, but I wouldn't go so far as to say it's not allowed. Once again,
this is a case of trying to prove a negative assertion.
> mInDu'[Daj] poSmoHpu' HoD
> the captain has opened his eyes"
I like this translation much better in any case.
> which BTW could also mean that the captain opened someone else's eyes
> (e.g. an unconscious prisoner under interrogation). (I wonder if
> there's any way to distinguish "his eyes" from "his own eyes"?)
I think the trick is to distinguish the *other* eyes:
qam mInDu' poHmoHpu' HoD
the captain has opened the prisoner's eyes
SuStel
Stardate 7925.7