tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Nov 11 14:39:16 2009

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing



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

Re: Yet another newbie!

Krenath (krenath@gmail.com)



Huh.

If I'm understanding it properly, 'oH and 'oHtaH may be analogous to  
the verbs "ser" and "estar" in Spanish.


So:

'oH and ser talk about what something is when that aspect is somewhat  
permanent.

'oHtaH and estar talk about what something is *currently* when that  
aspect is expected to be able to change, such as a location

Sound about right?



On Nov 11, 2009, at 4:42 PM, Terrence Donnelly <terrence.donnelly@sbcglobal.net 
 > wrote:

> --- On Wed, 11/11/09, Steven Boozer <sboozer@uchicago.edu> wrote:
>
>>>>
>>>>   bIQ'a'Daq 'oHtaH 'etlh'e'
>>>>   The sword is in the ocean. KGT
>>
>> ter'eS:
>>> But not with negatives? ?{bIQ'a'Daq 'oHbe' 'etlh'e'}
>>
>> That's an interesting question.  AFAIK we don't have
>> any examples of {PRONOUNtaHbe'} or {PRONOUNbe'taH} in the
>> corpus, whether referring to location or not.
>>
>
> I actually like plain {'oHbe'} by analogy with {'oH} used in a  
> question (eg. {nuqDaq 'oH}). In the question, you don't know if  
> something has continued existence somewhere, so you don't presume  
> that, only ask if it exists. In the positive answer, you are  
> stressing its presumed continued existence in a given place. In the  
> negative, you are focusing on the fact that something is not  
> somewhere; stressing its on-going not-being seems redundant.
>
> -- ter'eS
>
>
>






Back to archive top level