tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Dec 09 05:29:25 1996

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing



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

KLBC: aspect and things



> > > > 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?
> 
> You've used it correctly now.  {rIntaH} is just a more obvious and forceful 
> way to say {-ta'}, and must come after the verb you're saying is completed and 
> undo-able.  It cannot stand on its own as a grammatical marker, although it is 
> a verb in its own right.  As a verb, it functions very differently than it 
> does as an aspect marker.

I'm still not sure I understand this. Doesn't "rIntaH" just mean "it is 
accomplished", or something similar? So if I do something, can't I just
report, "rIntaH", to say that I have accomplished it?

> > > > 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?
> 
> What I mean is, why did you use an aspect marker at all?  Somehow, it made 
> more sense to me without it.  {SoSwI' *credit card* vIlo'.  chaw'.}  "I used 
> my mother's credit card.  She permitted it."  WITH the suffix, it means "I had 
> used my mother's credit card.  She permitted it."
> 
> Still, what you said was not wrong.  I'm just not sure it jibes with the rest 
> of the message.

But if I just said <vIlo'>, that could have meant that I'm doing it, or am
going to do it, couldn't it? How do you think I should have said it, to
get across the idea that the transaction has been completed (or even
accomplished)?

> SuStel
> Beginners' Grammarian
> Stardate 96928.1

'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.)   |
 --------------------------------------------------------------------



Back to archive top level