tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Jun 12 20:46:02 2002
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
RE: cha'DIch KLBC rI' BG
- From: Qov <email@example.com>
- Subject: RE: cha'DIch KLBC rI' BG
- Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2002 08:07:47 -0700
> So I guess my question now is, is the aspect (and thus the relative time
> context) inherited by any sentence other than the second sentence of an
SAO > contruction?
If a succeeding sentence inherited the same "completion" idea than it would
be difficult to say things like:
wa'nem Heghpu' vavnI'wI'. reH wIqaw.
In a year, my grandfather will be dead. We will remember him forever.
Also, don't feel that you may add -pu' to any action that has been or will
be completed, just about all actions become completed eventually. Reserve
it for actions where the completion is the point of the utterance.
DaHjaj muD Duj vIchIj
Today I will fly an atmospheric vessel..
There is a point later today where I "will have navigated" (chIjpu') an
airplane, but unless my point has something to do with being done flying
for the day, I don't say it.
I wrote this before I read charghwI''s excellent explanation of the time
stamp versus perfective. Pay attention to what he says about the time of
utterance being unimportant.
Have you ever seen a website that gave an out of date schedule?
Like it says:
March: we will start working in the garden
April: we will have finished the garden and start on the garage
And it's now September?
In Klingon you wouldn't be able to tell that the page had been written
earlier. Seeing the page in February, you would read the future
tense. Seeing the page in September you would read the past tense. From
the same words. Cool eh?