tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Jan 25 09:41:10 1999
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: KLBC: jIjat
charghwI' wrote:
>
> On Sun, 24 Jan 1999 22:19:23 -0800 (PST) Eric Andeen
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > jatlh netlh:
> >
> > > vaghHu' vay' vItu'
> > > pIj tlhIngan Hol pab vIlo' DIvI' Hol mu'tlhegh vIchenmoHDI'
> >
> > I think that in this sentence you want <-vIS> instead of <-DI'>. Look at the
> > first definition given for <-DI'>: "as soon as". So a sentence of the form
> > <X-DI', Y> really means that first X happens, and then Y happens, which is
> > not what you want.
>
> I have to disagree somewhat here. This is a slippery area of
> grammar and different people interpret it differently, so allow
> me to describe it as I understand it.
>
I don't disagree with charghwI's remarks, but want to approach them from
a slightly
different angle.
> {-taHvIS} has the sense that the action occurs over a span of
> time and sometime during that span, the action of the main verb
> occurs. jIyIttaHvIS Qanqor vIghom. I met Krankor while I was
> walking. The action of walking took a span of time and at some
> arbitrary point during the walk, I met Krankor. The meeting took
> less time than the walk.
I don't think this is the only interpretation. It can mean that, but
I think this does not rule out the notion that both actions occur for
the
same amount of time, as far as I read the definition. /X-taHvIS Y/
defines
a specific span of time (while X is occuring), but Y can be _either_ a
one-time, intermittent or continuous action during that span of time. I
don't see /-taHvIS/ limiting the nature of the Y verb.
> {-DI'} has more of a sense of one event triggering another. The
> action of the verb with {-DI'} triggers the event of the main
> verb. jIyItDI' Qanqor vIghom. "When I walked, I met Krankor."
> Maybe I'm under house arrest and Krankor is my guard. Whenever I
> leave my doorway, there he is, waiting for me. This gives you
> less of a description of the environment of our meeting than it
> does a time stamp. My meeting occurs when my walking occurs.
>
tlhoS jIQochbe'. You imply there to be an element of causation
in this suffix, where /X-DI' Y/ implies that X _caused_ Y to happen.
This leads me to wonder sometimes how this differs from /-mo'/. What
is the difference between /jIyItDI' Qanqor vIghom/ and /jIyItmo' Qanqor
vIghom/? I think that the idea of causation is only one of the
ways to interpret this.
Maybe "triggers the event" isn't the right term. I'd rather say that
event
Y could not occur until event X did, and that event X may or may not
have caused action Y.
> In other words, {-taHvIS} describes the environment of the
> action. It is adverbial in function. {-DI'} provides a time
> stamp for the action.
To be picky, these suffixes might act like adverbial phrases, but
they're
not adverbs, they're subordinate verb phrases. If I had to coin a name
for
them, I'd call them "event stamps": they define the event environment in
which the main action occurs.
-- ter'eS
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Corridor/2711