tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Thu Nov 14 20:17:21 1996
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
RE: KLBC - just "jatlh" - why?
- From: "David Trimboli" <[email protected]>
- Subject: RE: KLBC - just "jatlh" - why?
- Date: Fri, 15 Nov 96 02:18:17 UT
jatlh Al Weiner:
> So I'll change my question to:
> Why <jatlh> instead of <jatlhta'> ?
{jatlhta'} means "have said," "had said," or "will have said." It is not past
tense, it is completed aspect It indicates that at whatever time the sentence
refers to, the action was already completed. With {-ta'} it means it was
completed intentionally. With {-pu'}, there is no indication that it was done
on purpose. See the FAQ.
I *could* say {jatlhta'}, but whether or not the saying is completed is not
important. I *could* say {jatlhta' *Al*, <qatlh . . .>}, and it would mean
"Al had said 'Why . . .'" But if I just say {jatlh *Al*, <qatlh . . .>}, it
means "Al said, 'Why . . .'"
SuStel
Beginners' Grammarian
Stardate 96873.6