tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sun Oct 24 13:23:15 1999

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: Imperatives with aspect

>From: "Patrick Masterson" <>
>Date: Sun, 24 Oct 1999 12:55:59 PDT
>I was wondering what the meaning of imperative verbs with aspect suffixes 
>would mean.
>-pu' means an action is finished or completed, so tlhutlhpu' would mean "he 
>finished drinking" or "he completed (the act of) drinking".
>Would yItlhutlhpu' mean "Finish drinking!"?

"-pu'" is perfective, meaning the act is over, not necessarily "completed"
in the sense you mean.  I could say "jItlhutlhpu'" to mean "I have drunk"
even if I only sipped and the cup isn't empty yet.

Think of this way.  "bItlhutlhpu'" is "you have drunk" (or "you will have
drunk" or so on).  Making it imperative makes it like "Be such that you
have drunk!"  i.e. make your drinking something completed... I suppose
"finish drinking" isn't a bad translation, come to think of it, though it
doesn't necessarily imply that you should finish your drink.  I'm not sure
I can get used to it though.

>LIkewise: yItlhutlhta' "Finish drinking (on purpose)!" (or something along 
>those lines)
>yItlhutlhtaH "Keep drinking!"
>yItlhutlhlI' "Keep drinking! (but stop eventually)"
>Would those be correct?

"Be such that you're continuously (or extendedly) drinking"... yeah, "keep
drinking" is pretty much right.  We have "yIjuntaH" (or juntaH) in canon
for "execute continuous evasive maneuvers"


Back to archive top level