tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Feb 03 04:28:40 2010

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]

Re: Aspects in Klingon

Lucas Big-Guy ([email protected]) 

You certainly are dedicated, for the first section, before you come to the
"Here come the problems:", part, I believe that you are quite correct.
After that, well I haven't had time to read it yet.

L.

On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 6:08 AM, André Müller <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hi there,
> I have problems determining what aspect suffixes I am to use when
> translating something into Klingon or when writing something original in
> Klingon. I have a problem understanding aspects in general (also in Russian
> and Chinese). I've read Bernard Comrie's book on aspect and I've read
> everything that Okrand wrote about aspect in Klingon (I think), yet I don't
> have a "feeling" for it.
> I understand the system in this way:
>
> {-taH} = imperfective/progressive (an ongoing action)
> {-lI'} = telic perfective (ongoing towards a known goal)
> {-pu'} = perfective (completed action)
> {-ta'} = volitional perfective (completed action which was intented)
> {-ø} = ??? (what aspect do we have when nothing is indicated)
>
> So I can quite easily determin which of these aspects I have to use by
> asking myself if the action is still ongoing in the frame of the sentence.
> If yes, I ask myself if the action is running towards some goal, so I can
> decide between {-lI'} and {-taH}. If the action is not ongoing but already
> finished in the frame of the sentence, I ask myself if the action was
> intented by the agent (then I'd chose {-ta'}), or if it was unintented and
> happened without someone's will (then I go for {-pu'}). So far, so good...
> is my way of thought correct so far?
>
> Here come the problems:
>
> a) Does {-pu'} mean explicitly that the completed action was unintentional
> or is it simply unmarked for volition? Can I use {-pu'} for all completed
> actions and need {-ta'} only when I want to specify that the action was
> also
> intented, or do I really *have* to decide each time? I'm feeling that I'm
> overusing {-pu'}. The same question goes for the distincion between {-taH}
> and {-lI'}: do I use the latter only when I want to specify or do I have to
> choose?
>
> b) What aspect do verb forms without a type 7 suffix have? Can it be
> somehow
> unmarked?
>
> c) As many learners, I think I might be overusing the {-pu'} (and {-ta'})
> suffixes. My most important question is: Are there any test questions I
> could ask myself each time to determine if I have to use an aspect suffix
> or
> a perfective suffix in particular? Or some English adverb like "already"
> that I can put into the sentence in my mind to check if it makes sense that
> way. I really need something like a test question or a test adverb to be
> inserted.
>
> For instance: "Person X became the friend of person Y." (a phrase often
> found on Facebook). When this sentence is displayed, the action lies
> already
> in the past (i.e., he already became Y's friend), so I'd use {-ta'} because
> on Facebook friendships are always volitionally induced, they don't just
> simply happen, as in reality. But do I really need a perfective aspect
> suffix here?
>
> And what's with pronominal verbs (copulae?) like {'oH} or {SoH} or {ghaH}?
> When I say "I was in Hungary this summer.", do I need a perfective aspect
> suffix?
> I know that when telling a story, I don't always need {-pu'} and {-ta'}
> because then the story itself is the frame and I only need to ask myself,
> if
> the action has already finished at the point of time that I am currently
> telling.
>
> Phew. Many questions... sorry for that. You see, I'm really trying to
> improve my understanding of the language.
>
> Greetings,
> - André
>
>
>

Back to archive top level