tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Jun 25 18:17:33 2002
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
RE: KBLC: Hegh
> Heghta' jupwIj vav cha'Hu'.
Time stamps go at the beginning of the sentence. (TKD p60).
Other than that, your sentence *could* be correct; without the english I
can't be certain of your intent. But, just in case, I will explain...
-ta' and -pu' are similar. -ta' is used when the activity is deliberately
undertaken. (TKD p41). Was there intent in his death?
-ta' and -pu' are not past-tense. They imply that the action is completed.
Whether it's future-tense or past-tense (per say) is set by the time-stamp.
cha'Hu' Hegh "Two days ago he died."
cha'Hu' Heghta' "Two days ago he had already died."
This can be set as future-tense.
wejleS' Hegh "Three days from now he will die."
wejleS' Heghta' "Three days from now he will already be dead." Maybe he
will die today, maybe tomorrow; By time three days from now gets here, he
will have died.
> chay', jISovbe'.
A rhetorical question followed by your answer?
Perhaps: meq vISovbe'.
chay' is only the *question* "how".
"I know how he did it." uses a different kind of "how".
> vIjatlhlaHbe'pu', jIH SaHmoH 'e'.
Same thing about -pu'. Not sure without the english.
The pronoun 'e' can be only the object, not the subject.
You can try using something like ghu'vam.
DloraH, BG