tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri Mar 05 06:49:11 1999
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
RE: Noun cases
> Don't worry. Klingon nouns do not have cases. We won't have to learn them as
> we had to in Russian, etc.
>
> This message actually regards Aspect, again, when helped out by partitive
> cases, as in Finnish and Yoruba. With partitive noun case markers we can
> subdivide the Perfective Aspect into separate *Events, as far as the time of
> occurrence, as well as describing the Condition or State of the verb.
>
> In Yoruba, some sentences seem to have no verb when using the Progressive
> Aspect. One says: I in eat; I in see, etc.
>
> My point regarding Klingon. There are so many definitions of Aspect for
> individual languages that we are going to have to determine exactly what
> Aspect is for Klingon alone. The discussion so far has been productive. But,
> I would claim that it is not conclusive for me. I want to see more concrete
> evidence from MO.
Well, I will agree that it's a good course of action to forget about what other languagse
do w.r.t. aspect, case and whatnot, and focus on the Klingon. So, with that goal in mind,
let's forget about what Finnish and Yoruba do with partitives to subdivide perfective
aspect. We have sketchy evidence at best about partitive interpretations in Klingon, and
no overt case markings to point the way. What evidence we *do* have is wholly unrelated
to aspect.
And since the only evidence that will asist you is direct from MO himself, why are we even
talking about this on this list?
> peHruS
-- Holtej 'utlh