tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Jan 10 18:01:27 1996
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
cha'logh jImeQ
- From: [email protected]
- Subject: cha'logh jImeQ
- Date: Wed, 10 Jan 1996 21:00:53 -0500
tlhobmeH ghItlh SuStel:
>> Also, can anyone tell me a good way to express the word "still," as in
"Does
>> he still read this mailing list?"
jangmeH ghItlh charghwI':
>That, like the famous, "Do you still beat your wife?" presumes
>that the activity every happened. I never knew that pIn'a' ever
>had access to the list, hence the occasional contribution by a
>go-between who would post here.
This still doesn't answer the kid's question.
>> The best I can come up with is
>> {jabbI'IDghomvam laD 'e' taH'a'}.
>jabbI'IDghomvam laDtaH'a' pIn'a'?
jangmeH ghItlh ghunchu'wI':
>I wince when I see apparently stative verbs forced to take an object.
So do I.
>I believe {taH} is stative; if you want to say he continues to read,
>you might try {laD 'e' taHmoH}. I think the suffix {-taH} does well
>to capture the meaning you want, though: {laDtaH'a' ghaH} should be
>fine.
I'm troubled by this solution. My reputation of criticism against nit-pickers
may precede me, but this nit bothers me too much to just brush it back into
the weeds. Twice the suggestion has arisen of using -taH to convey "continue
to". -taH is more along the lines of "do continually", or better, "to be in
the process of". I can fully understand why it would seem right to use -taH
to say "I still/continue to read the mailing list." Altho, I must assert my
understanding of it has always been of the connotation of "I am reading the
mailing list", viz., a process or continual action, not an event that has
occured in the past habitually and now recurs once more.
One needs only think once about the difference of meanings between "I still
read this list" and "I am reading this list". I will not bring this up again,
because of the ferocious argumentation that it will give birth to, mostly
resultant of differing backgrounds. There are devices and concepts in other
language that make the use of -taH as I've described it clear, e.g., Russian,
English, Greek, French, Esperanto. The imperfective aspect, the aorist tense.
A quick dismissal of the importance of these concepts in the study of a
language topological similar to naturally-occuring languages never fails to
infuriate me (as many know already).
I'm beyond my former immaturity of running and hiding from the list (altho I
did have more time for Hamlet that way). But if we can't exchange ideas while
recognizing the significance of the relevant background material, viz.
linguistics, I can't see discussion of grammatical matters as having any
constructivity anymore, and I expect in that case that others will not
criticize my own usages which may seem too 'radical'. It would be sad if we
found ourselves entrenched in such an attitude, but would probably allow our
minds not to be absorbed in the sheer temperature of irrational anger,
resulting from our yajQo'ghach'a'.
After linguistic matters are tended to, I should finally remark that I hope
that my age does not affect others' accounts of my credibility, and if my
written temperament and composure above does not convince you of that, then I
must have been wrong in believing that intelligence does not correlate to how
many plaques are on your wall.
And with that off my chest, I feel much better. Ahhh.
--Guido