tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sun Sep 28 20:22:01 1997
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: A time question
- From: Qov <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: A time question
- Date: Sun, 28 Sep 1997 20:21:48 -0700
At 14:15 97-09-28 -0700, you wrote:
}I've been thinking about the ubiquitous {qaStaHvIS}.
}
}We know that simple time stamps give the adverb (noun?) of time at the
}beginning of the phrase, without any marking, eg. {DaHjaj ram qagh vISop}.
}'Tonight I will eat ghagh.'; {benmey law' maqIHchuq} 'We met many years ago.'
}
}To express _duration_, we've always used phrases with {qaStaHvIS}, like
}{qaStaHvIS poH nI' qagh vISopbe'} 'I haven't eaten ghagh for a long time.'
As does MO in {qaStaHvIS wa' ram loS SaD Hugh SIjlaH qetbogh loD}.
}Recently qoror suggested the phrase {nI'taHvIS poH} for {qaStaHvIS poH nI'},
}which I liked a lot and immediately started using myself. My question is,
}could this formula be extended? How about
}
}{puStaHvIS tup} for a few minutes
}{law'taHvIS jaj} for many days
It is missing the idea that the minutes occur, although this would generally
be inferred. Compare: {qaStaHvIS tup puS yIn lutlho'} with {puStaHvIS tup
yIn lutlho'}.
Being literal:
During a few minutes they appreciate life.
While the minutes are few they appreciate life.
}{nI'ta'DI' poH} after a long time
}{law'ta'DI' DIS} after many years
{-ta'} makes no sense here. Are you suggesting the period of time has volition?
{nI'pu'DI' poH} and {law'pu'DI' DIS} work for me.
}{law'pa' tup} before many minutes had passed,
There are contexts where you ould have to indicate, as you did in English,
that the minutes did occur.
}and so forth. Any comments?
Usually understandable, sometimes ambiguous.
Qov [email protected]
Beginners' Grammarian