tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Dec 10 15:09:10 2007

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: usage of type-7 aspect suffix {-pu}

Alan Anderson ( [KLI Member] [Hol po'wI']

ja' SuStel:

> There are certain people, for another instance, who would insist that
> the sentence *{bIpuj 'e' vItobta'} is a perfectly valid way to say "I
> have proven that you are weak." Perfectly valid, they would claim,
> because, despite the explicit rule in TKD against putting a Type 7  
> verb
> suffix on the first verb in a sentence-as-object constructions, it
> "makes sense" and "should be allowed." But this just isn't so.

Maybe it is allowed in certain dialects.

Skybox card S26, {lurSa' be'etor je} "Lursa and B'Etor":
{DuraS tuq tlhIngan yejquv patlh luDub 'e' reH lunIDtaH DuraS  
be'nI'pu' lurSa' be'etor je.}
"The sisters of Duras, Lursa™ and B'Etor™ are constantly seeking a  
higher standing for the house of Duras within the Klingon™ High  

Note {...luDub 'e' reH lunIDtaH...}.

> The correct sentence is {bIpujta' 'e' vItob}.

How is that "the" correct sentence?  "I prove that you have been  
weak."  That's not at all the same thing. It also places an aspect  
suffix onto a verb of quality, keeping open the contentious issue I  
thought we had moved beyond.

I suggest that {bIpuj 'e' vItob rIntaH} is a more faithful  
translation of "I have proven that you are weak."

-- ghunchu'wI'

Back to archive top level