tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Nov 14 11:12:17 1995

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing



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

Re: jIQagh 'e' vIpay



>Date: Mon, 13 Nov 1995 23:00:00 -0800
>From: [email protected]

>In a message dated 95-11-13 16:54:22 EST, you write:

>>qaStaHvIS wejHu' Qagh law' vIghItlhpu'.

>I am still studying the differences among "Three days ago" and "During the
>past three days," et cetera.  I would appreciate comments from the experts
>iregarding {qaStaHvIS wejHu'} to see if it means "During the last three
>days."

I agree that the business with "Hu'" and "ben" et al can be confusing,
partly because the words are confusing and partly because we really don't
know what the rules are regarding timestamps.  Okrand very happily uses
timestamps unmarked most of the time, but most of us prefer to use
"qaStaHvIS" or something like that when the timestamp is complex.  I would
agree that "qaStaHvIS wejHu'" would likely be "during the past three days,"
but only because it's the best option out there.  If you really think about
it, "wejHu'" properly means "the day two days before yesterday."  Thus
"qaStaHvIS wejHu'" would mean "three days ago."  The only reason I'd say
"during the last three days" works as well is because "three days ago"
would more likely be expressed as just "wejHu'" with no marking.  I think
we basically just have to be flexible when it comes to timestamps.

>Earlier I had used {wej jajmey rIntaH} as "For three days."

This doesn't really work, as charghwI' points out.  "rIntaH" in its special
use paralleling "-ta'" has to follow a sentence (with a verb), and "wej
jajmey" is a noun phrase.  Even if you had a verb (e.g. "qaS"), like "qaS
wej jajmey rIntaH", that would be a complete sentence: three days have
happened.  It couldn't be used as a timestamp.  If you're not using
"rIntaH" in its special aspect meaning, you have another problem, since
"rIn" means "be accomplished", and doesn't seem to take an object (and you
have the "three days" preceding it).  Nor can it be an adjective, since
adjectival verbs can't have "-taH".

>peHruS

~mark


Back to archive top level