tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Feb 27 10:33:02 2007
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: Topic (was: Re: Dilbert Comic in Klingon for February 9, 2007
- From: McArdle <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: Topic (was: Re: Dilbert Comic in Klingon for February 9, 2007
- Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2007 10:32:16 -0800 (PST)
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:Date:From:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Message-ID; b=ffrOuIa8Bq7QiGDZ6Imyxd1RVIlraapXQBq9uL5eBn+Ib2AClTzCnWIaj1BpjAFPRwxX4q+4KT8DDFIC7UWiyyh6AHgitAMPvPOt861E0SNci0UQQQ2fHLa+nhqCTBHFd2oosuutcAqlbmAtlCHea8oq9n8KS9Ol8gJPx2WCXnY=;
- In-reply-to: <[email protected]>
Steven Boozer <[email protected]> wrote:
>mIq'ey:
>>
>> qatoy'taH wa'ben 'e' vItagh
>>
>>This seems (to me) to mean exactly what we want it to mean. Are there
>>objections to it from a grammatical (or, for that matter, any other) point
>>of view?
>
>I like this, but the time-stamp should precede the verb:
>
>wa' ben qatoy'taH 'e' vItagh.
>"I began serving you (continuously) a year ago"
But why? The timestamp applies to the main verb: it's the beginning, not the continuous service, that's located a year in the past. (I.e., I see the meaning as "I serve you continuously; a year ago I began it", not "A year ago I serve you continuously; I began it.") Although I've lost track of my copy of TKD (temporarily, I hope), I'm sure I've seen a number of examples of main clauses where an adverb precedes {'e'}. Are these wrong? Is there a special restriction on adverbials of time, parallel to the restriction on the use of aspectual suffixes?
qavan
mIq'ey
---------------------------------
No need to miss a message. Get email on-the-go
with Yahoo! Mail for Mobile. Get started.