tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Jun 08 07:26:21 1998
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
RE: KLBC: Q on {-meH}
> SuStelvo':
> >If you like to think of this sort of thing as an infinitive, fine, but I
> >think that'll cause problems later. I prefer to think of this
> >as a generic or unconsidered usage.
>
ter'eSvo':
> _I_ don't call it an infinitive, that was charghwI''s term. I'd call the
> {-meH} usage with a verb a dependent verb phrase, and the {-meH} verb with
a
> noun I'd call a nominative (that is, something behaving like a noun, since
it's
> part of a noun-noun phrase, but which is not in origin a noun).
An "infinitive" is, by definition, a verb which is not inflected for tense.
Non-finite. Technically, all verbs in Klingon are infinitives! This
probably doesn't help much here, though....
I see where the intended meaning comes from, though. In English, gerunds
are infinitival verbs acting as nouns. "Eating," "running," "a knife for
cutting," etc. If you're groping for terminology, these elements (nouns,
adjectives or adverbs derived from verbs) are termed "verbids." In English,
verbids are always infinite, and non-finite verbs never have overt subjects,
though they may have objects. They are also never main verbs in a sentence.
In Klingon, non-finite verbs certainly may have subjects, since, as I said,
all Klingon verbs are infinite (that is, uninflected for tense).
> -- ter'eS
--Holtej