tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Thu Mar 04 16:04:35 1999

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

RE: Aspect

jatlh DloraH:

>> -lI' implies that there is a goal.  Progress is being made toward that
>> goal. It is not simply that 'taH is continuous and -lI' has an ending.
>> -taH is continuous whether there is a known goal or not.  -lI' can be 
>> used only when there is an implied goal.

jIjatlh:

>bIlughqa'. I would like to clarify a little bit here. TKD says that the
>activity has "a know goal or a definite stopping point", and uses the 
>word "goal" through the rest of the text. This strongly indicates that 
>the "goal" is not necessarily something anyone set out intentionally to 
>do - it's just the logical conclusion of the action. This opens <-lI'> 
>up to a wider range of usage than <-ta'>.

jatlh DloraH:

>I disagree.  How can you unintentionally have a goal.  A "goal" is your
>"intention".  You said yourself "...and uses the word "goal" through the
>rest of the text."  If the act was "the logical conclusion of the action"
>and was not intentional, I think you should use -taH, as it is stated in 
>TKD.

>>>>

TKD p42 & 43
"-lI' in progress

 This suffix is similar to -taH (continuous) in that it indicates that an
activity is ongoing.  Unlike -taH, however, -lI' implies that the activity
has a known goal or a definite stopping point.  In other words, it suggests
that progress is being made toward that goal.

  chollI'  it is getting closer
        (chol get close, come near)

 This word would be used for, i.e., a missile approaching a target, when it
is known that the missile has been aimed at that target.  If a missile is
getting closer, but its intended destination is not known, choltaH (with
-taH continuous) would be more appropriate.

        vIlI'lI'  I am transmitting (the data)
                (lI' transmit data to a place)

 This word implies that data are in the process of being transmitted, but
that there is a finite amount of data, so there will be a definite end to
the transmission. The fact that the verb lI' and the suffix -lI' are
identical in sound is purely coincidental, so far as can be determined.

 The suffix -taH (continuous) can be used whether there is a known goal or
not. -lI', on the other hand, can be used only when there is an implied
goal. It is possible to consider -lI' a [continuous] counterpart of -ta',
and -taH a [continuous] counterpart of -pu'."

>>>>

My point here is that <-lI'> does NOT, unlike <-ta'>, imply that the subject
actively set out to accomplish a goal. I would never say <DoS Qaw'ta' peng>
- the torpedo is not capable of setting out to accomplish any goal at all.
It is an inanimate object. I would, however, have no problem using Okrand's
example of <DoS chollI' peng>. The torpedo has no intentions of its own, but
<-lI'> does not require that.

<-ta'> implies that the action had a definite point of completion, that the
subject intentionally set out to achieve the completion of the action, and
that the subject did in fact accomplish it. <-lI'> implies that the action
has a definite point of completion, and that the action is progressing
toward that completion. It does not imply anything about whether the action
was undertaken intentionally by the subject.

There is certainly a parallel between <-lI'> and <-ta'>, but the parallel is
not perfect. Just another example of why Klingon is more like a natural
language than a constructed one.


pagh
Beginners' Grammarian

Back to archive top level