tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Dec 03 12:44:30 1996
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
RE: KLBC: Re: Hamlet
> > > > *Hamlet* vIneH!
> > > > chay' vIje'?
> > > nom <http://www.kli.org> yISuch.
> > > > Huch *American* vIghajbe'.
> > > <credit card> DaghajnIS.
> >
> > rIntaH.
>
> What is finished?
*Hamlet* vIje' rIntaH.
I have purchased "Hamlet". (As on TKD p.41.)
"It remains accomplished... it is done, and it cannot be undone."
OK, so it didn't make much sense following on from the "<credit-card>
DaghajnIS" bit. Maybe I should have put it after the bit about going to
the KLI page with someone's credit card SHARPISH!! Would it have made
sense then?
> > SoS *credit card* vIlo'ta'. chaw'.
> > I used my mother's credit card. She permitted it.
>
> Is there a reason you used {-ta'} on {lo'}? Your translation doesn't shed any
> light on this.
TKD p.41: "This suffix is used when an activity was deliberately
undertaken, the implication being that someone set out to do something and
in fact did it."
Well, I set out to order "Hamlet" from the KLI's website, and in fact did
it. Isn't that right? OK, I suppose it wasn't necessary, but was it
actually incorrect?
It's rather confusing: I've previously been learning a language with tense
and no aspect (Esperanto); now I'm learning one with aspect and no tense.
Tricky.
'olIva'
--------------------------------------------------------------------
| Oliver PEREIRA | [email protected] ***VIVU ESPERANTO!*** |
| Selwyn College, | See the Cambridge Esperanto Group's web page at |
| Cambridge | http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/users/etg10/keg.html |
| CB3 9DQ | It's really good! (Because I didn't write it.) |
--------------------------------------------------------------------