tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Thu Jan 23 19:47:06 1997
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
RE: Another Attempt at Controversy
Sustel wrote:
|January 23, 1997 4:51 AM EST, jatlh peHruS:
|> Then, we could have vagh tup tlhIngan Hol paq vIlaDpu', correct?
|> The time stamps act in the position of adverbs, correct?
|
|Yes, but it's a time-stamp, not a duration-stamp. We have seen that durations
|are usually indicated with some construction using {-vIS}, like {qaStaHvIS}.
|
|qaStaHvIS vagh tup paq vIlaDtaH.
Correct. But use the imperfective only if you didn't finish it (or not
interested in specifying whether you finished it or not): "I read the book
for five minutes". If you were a speed reader and managed to read it
through, then use the perfective to make it explicit: qaStaHvIS vagh tup
paq vIlaDpu' ("I read the book in five minutes"). For the Russian speakers
on the list (and there are several), this is the difference between "Ya
chital knigu piat' minut" and "Ya prochital knigu za piat' minut".
How would we say: "In five minutes, I'll read the book" (i.e. I'll start
reading five minutes from now)? qaSpu'DI' vagh tup paq vIlaD? Of course,
depending on what part of the process you want to focus on you could also
say: qaSpu'DI' vagh tup paq vIlaDtaH/vIlaDlI' ("Ya budu chitat' knigu
cherez piat' minut") and qaSpu'DI' vagh tup paq vIlaDpu'/vIlaDta' ("Ya
prochitayu knigu cherez piat' minut").
This is actually an advantage of an aspectual system, you can be much more
precise with just one or two syllables (aspect markers). In English we
would have to add a couple more words to each translation in order to
distinguish between these five variations. And I'm not really sure we can
easily distinguish between -taH and -lI' or between -pu' and -ta' without
using *several* more words.
Anyone want to discuss Klingon aspect for a while?
Voragh