RE: cha'DIch KLBC rI' BG

[Qov <qov@direct.ca>]

 > 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Have you ever seen a website that gave an out of date schedule?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?