On Sat, Apr 12, 2014 at 6:23 PM, SuStel <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Klingon -pu' and -ta' have examples showing both PERFECTIVE and
PERFECT aspects. They can mean either of these things. TKD calls it
"perfective," but the definition is not strictly correct. What most
people believe, incorrectly as I see it, is that these suffixes
indicate what is correctly called perfect aspect.
Could one not say {wa'leS ghaH HoHlu'pu'}, indicating that by
tomorrow he will have gotten himself killed? This sentence uses
perfective but not in any past sense, Klingon cultural attitudes toward
counting one's chickens notwithstanding. If grammar allows such a
construction, it would divorce -pu' and -ta' from any connection with
the past, except insofar as the past is more somewhat more certain than
the future.