tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Sep 30 15:17:36 1996

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: -taH (was: Re: KLBC)

96-09-29 23:25:45 EDT, jatlh trI'Qal:

> I really think that this supports my claim that using -taH implies that the
>  action doesn't/did not stop.
>  
>  If you look at the original sentence, it was "The pet which was running
bit
>  him."  The translator used -pu' on "to bite" and -taH on "to run" which,
as
>  I stated, implies to ME, after reading the description in the KD of -taH,
>  that the pet is ALWAYS running:  it was running then (at the time of the
>  bite, since we have a perfective in there) and it is running now, and it
>  probably has not stopped in the meanwhile.

This is where you are thinking of tense.  {qettaHbogh Saj} doesn't mean that
the pet is running at all times; it simply means that at the time we are
referring to in the sentence, the pet was running and was not stopping.
 There is no reference at all to "now."  "Now" is the time at which the
sentence is being said.  In fact, you may be talking about your own pet, who
is sitting obediently at your feet when you say it.  You can still use {-taH}
because you are referring to some other TIME (tense).

>  As for your analogy to the headline, I think that you are forgetting that
>  the main difference between -taH and -lI' is that -lI' has the SAME
meaning,
>  but that the action does and will have an end-point.  In the case of a
point
>  out a dog out of a group of dogs, it's very likely that the dog will stop
>  running at some point (it's probably running for REASON, even if it *is*
>  just to play, and when it reaches it's goal, it will stop, and turn
around,
>  or whatever), and the dog is certainly making headway towards this goal.
>  In your headline exaple in the English, this doesn't even come into play:
>  you are talking about tense; I am talking about continuity--whether or not
>  something is going to end.  I think that if said headline were used in
>  Klingon, -lI' would be used, and not -taH, for this very reason

I don't think this is quite how {-taH} and {-lI'} work.  {-lI'} doesn't mean
the action has an undefined stopping point, as you seem to suggest with your
dog example above.  {qettaH Saj} means that the pet is just going for a trot,
not too worried about where it's going.  Whether or not it will eventually
stop is irrelevant.  The point of {-taH} is that there is no *specified*
goal.  On the other hand, {qetlI' Saj} could be used when saying, for
example, that the pet is running home.  At the instant that the sentence is
referring to (by context), the pet is continuously performing this action,
but this action will eventually be completed.

I don't remember exactly what ~mark's headline example was, but I suppose the
suffix used would depend on the context.  For example, early headlines about
Flight 800 would use {nejlI'} for searching, because at first people were
hopeful to find everything in a nice, neat bundle.  However, when it was
eventually realized that pieces of the plane were scattered all over, and
that the search could probably go on indefinitely, Klingon headlines would
have probably started to use {nejtaH} (or, more probably, {nejtaHqu'}, just
to make the point).

I really think it would depend on context.

SuStel
Stardate 96749.8

Back to archive top level