tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Sep 01 20:18:13 1999

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: Vowels

>Date: Wed, 1 Sep 1999 21:53:55 -0500
>From: Alan Anderson <>
>ja' peHruS:
>>*telegrams ngeHmeH motlh loS mI'mey lo' China'nganpu'.  chovnatlh vI'ang:
>>mu' {wo3} 'oS mI' 2053 'ej mu' {da4} 'oS mI' 1129.  vaj wo3 da4 mu'tlhegh
>>moj.  tlhIngan Hol vImughDI' {jItIn} lu'oS.
>jImIS.  mu'mey 'oSbogh patHeyvam vIyajbe'chu'.
>"wo3" ngaj law' "2053" ngaj puS.  jatlhmeH "wo3" DuH law' "2053" DuH puS!
>qatlh "wo3 da4" ghItlhbe'lu'?  qatlh QatlhmoHbogh pat wIvlu'?

"wo3" puS lutu'lu' (chaq).  *China-Hol qellu'DI', pIj mu' puS 'oS wa'
QIch.  wa' mu' neH 'oH "2053"'e'.

>>qep'a' javDIchDaq China'ngan Hol jatlhlaH je MO 'e' vItu'.  chobDaq
>>matay'taHvIS MO pemla' jIH je, China'ngan Hol wIlo'pu'.
>'ach chobDaq Sutay'taHqu'vIS, Holvetlh bolo''a'?
>In case you don't realize it, I'm asking if you used it *while* you were
>in the corridor.  What you said was that while you were in the corridor,
>you *had* used it.  It makes it sound a lot like when you were together
>in the hallway, speaking Chinese was complete.  The meaning I assume you
>want and the grammatical implications of what you wrote are at odds with
>one another.

Don't be *too* hasty, though.  Yes, in this case you're right, but I could
easily see, in isolation or another setting, {chobDaq jIHtaHvIS tlhIngan
Hol vIlo'pu'} to mean "I have used Klingon while standing in a hallway."
The {-pu'} is perfective in aspect, and the time setting is provided by
context... but context is an inherently ambiguous critter.  The -taHvIS
clause might be providing it, or maybe it's provided by the still larger
context around it, or the context of the here-and-now.  That is, the {-pu'}
might have its scope limited by the -taHvIS clause, or it may belong to a
larger environment.  I believe this ambiguity is consistent with natural
language use and what we know about Klingon.


Back to archive top level