tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue May 25 12:49:46 2004

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: action verbs vs. qualities

Steven Boozer ([email protected]) [KLI Member] 

Voragh:
> >As I read this, {-lI'} can only be used with action verbs, not qualities
> >(a.k.a. stative verbs).  Note that his two TKD examples - the only
> >canonical examples of {-lI'} we have BTW - are on action verbs. AFAIK all
> >canon examples of {-ta'} "accomplished" are also with action verbs too.

SuStel:
>That's not really enough evidence to go on.  It's a rarely-seen suffix, and

You ain't kidding.  For some reason, Okrand has NEVER used this suffix 
outside of the explanation in TKD.  He has, however, used {-ta'} several 
times - not as many as {-taH} and {-pu'} however - and ALWAYS  on an action 
verb, never a quality.

>Okrand's example verbs are usually action verbs, regardless of what he's
>demonstrating (unless he's demonstrating a specifically qualitative
>expression).  I would not restrict {-lI'} and {-ta'} based on this
>speculation.

I would, though I'd call my suggestion "analysis" rather than "speculation" 
since it's badsed on a close reading of the texts.  I think that this 
"speculation" is an extension of the distinction between action verbs vs. 
quality verbs and, therefore, another of those "undocumented features" of 
the language we've managed to discover in our deliberations.  As Okrand 
says in TKD (p.59):

   The grammatical sketch is intended to be an outline of Klingon
   grammar, not a complete description... Although a good many of
   the fine points are not covered...

Okrand doesn't discuss these "fine points" explicitly, merely hints at 
them, but an examination of the corpus shows that he's consistent in his 
usage.  As an academically trained linguist Okrand uses his terms very 
carefully, even if he sometimes doesn't share the distinctions with 
us.  Let's re-read the relevant passage on {-lI'} "in progress" (TKD 42f):

> >  This suffix is similar to {-taH} "continuous" in that it indicates
> >  that an activity is ongoing. Unlike {-taH}, however, {-lI'} implies

N.B. "an activity is ongoing"

> >  that the activity has a known goal or a definite stopping point. In

N.B. "an activity", "goal", "stopping point"

> >  other words, it suggests that progress is being made toward that goal.

N.B. "progress is being made"

> >     {chollI'}   "it is getting closer"
> >  This word would be used for, i.e., a missile approaching a target,
> >  when it is known that the missile has been aimed at that target. If a
> >  missile is getting closer, but its intended destination is not known,
> >  {choltaH} (with {-taH} "continuous") would be more appropriate.
> >     {vIlI'lI'}  "I am transmitting (the data)"
> >  This word implies that data are in the process of being transmitted,
> >  but that there is a finite amount of data, so there will be a definite
> >  end to the transmission. The fact that the verb {lI'} and the suffix
> >  {-lI'} are identical in sound is purely coincidental, so far as can be
> >  determined. The suffix {-taH} continuous can be used whether there is
> >  a known goal or not. {-lI'}, on the other hand, can be used only when
> >  there is an implied goal. It is possible to consider {-lI'} a continuous

N.B. "goal"

> >  counterpart of {-ta'}, and {-taH} a continuous counterpart of {-pu'}.

And, since he specifically links it with {-lI'}, here's what he has to say 
about {-ta'}:

   This suffix is similar to {-pu'}, but it is used when an activity
   was deliberately undertaken, the implication being that someone set
   out to do something and in fact did it.  [TKD 41]

Again: "an activity was deliberately undertaken", "set out to do something".

An action has a beginning and an end point, it can be completed or 
not.  Qualities are simply present or not (though they can have varying 
degrees of intensity).  It's the difference between doing and being, action 
and state.  {-chu'} "clearly, perfectly, (absolutely) properly, etc." is 
another of these suffixes that is only used only with action verbs.  Okrand 
says that it

   "indicates action is performed absolutely properly." (PK)

The sole example I can find of {-chu'} occurring with a quality is:

   ... Say'moHchu' may' 'Iw
   The blood of battle washes clean ... (Anthem)

and even here, Okrand has added the causative suffix {-moH} "cause" to the 
quality {Say'} "be clean" to make the whole thing an action verb: "cause 
(something) to be clean, make (something) clean".



-- 
Voragh
Ca'Non Master of the Klingons

Back to archive top level