[Tlhingan-hol] Perfective translations

[David Trimboli]

(I think this was meant for the list, so I'm reposting my reply to
lojmIt tI'wI'nuv here.)

On 12/5/2011 9:47 AM, lojmIt tI'wI'nuv wrote:

> On Dec 4, 2011, at 9:04 PM, David Trimboli wrote:
>
>> On 12/4/2011 7:45 PM, Qov robyn at flyingstart.ca
>> <mailto:robyn at flyingstart.ca>> wrote:
>>> It wasn't my thesis. I was just providing an explanation of the
>>> Latin thing. I have been told that Marc went out of his way to
>>> make Klingon as unexpected as possible in comparison to Earth
>>> norms, in many ways. Translations of sample text in TKD makes it
>>> seem as though -pu' was originally a tense marker, though. Or
>>> maybe Marc was never that hot at languages with aspect, either.
>>
>> I no longer think this. I believe the problem is ours: a
>> misapplication of the term "perfective"
>> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perfective_aspect> to mean "perfect"
>> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perfect_(grammar)>.
>>
>> We have often described -pu' and -ta' as telling us that an action
>> is completed as of the time context. For example, {wa'Hu'
>> Daleghpu'} "as of yesterday you had seen it." This isn't perfective
>> aspect; it seems more like perfect aspect (they're different).
>>
>> -pu' is described as "perfective." Perfective aspect means the
>> event is viewed as a completed whole, without internal temporal
>> parts. The event is to be looked at as something begun and finished
>> all in one word. Thus, {wa'Hu' Daleghpu'} means "you saw it
>> yesterday," in that the seeing started and finished yesterday, and
>> we aren't expressing that the seeing had any internal process that
>> can be detailed. You saw it, and the seeing was finished, all in
>> one go. This is perfective.
>>
>> The trouble is, English doesn't make this distinction easily; to do
>> so you have to use complicated locutions like the ones I used in
>> the previous paragraph. "You have seen it" and "you saw it" are
>> both approximately correct translations of {Daleghpu'}, but neither
>> really captures the precise perfective flavor.
>>
>> And when we get {vIneHpu'} "I wanted them" and {qaja'pu'} "I told
>> you," the English looks like it's in the simple past tense, but
>> that's only because English can't get away from tense. The
>> translations are simply close enough (and we get these particular
>> translations because they come straight from the script of Star
>> Trek III).
>>
>> And since we are told in TKD 4.2.7 that the absence of a Type 7
>> suffix means the action is not completed and is not continuous, not
>> just that we have chosen not to mention the aspect. ALL Klingon
>> verbs make their aspects clear, even if that aspect is
>> "not-completed and not-continuous." Unfortunately, it seems Okrand
>> subsequently forgot this, because much of his later work ignores
>> the rule (or maybe he's come to believe our own erroneous
>> interpretation of perfective, if we've said it to him often
>> enough).
 >
> Interesting. So, if you wanted to say, "As of yesterday, he had seen
> it," one would best use something like:
>
> qaSpa' wa'Hu' leghpu'.
>
> Or am I missing something?

Yes, that works. But even then what you're saying is "as of yesterday he
began and finished seeing it all in one go." If that's what you mean,
great. Or you might say {qaSpa' wa'Hu' legh}, meaning "he saw it before
yesterday, but the seeing isn't continuous or completed." He might see
it habitually, and you're pointing out that the habitual seeing was
already the case yesterday.

-pu' means "I do it and it's done." -ta' means "I set out to do it and
accomplish it." -taH means "I do it constantly over a period of time."
-lI' means "I do it constantly over a period of time and make progress
toward my goal." And lacking an aspect suffix means "I do it from time
to time" or "it is true that I do it" or "I begin to do it" or all sorts
of other possible meanings, depending on context and other suffixes.

romuluSnganpu' vIHIvpu'
I attacked Romulans, and completed the attack

romuluSnganpu' vIHIvta'
I set out to attack Romulans, and completed the attack

romuluSnganpu' vIHIvtaH
I attack Romulans over a period of time

romuluSnganpu' vIHIvlI'
I attack Romulans over a period of time with a goal in mind, and make
progress toward that goal

romuluSnganpu' vIHIv
Some possible meanings, depending on context:
     I attack Romulans on principle
     I attack Romulans from time to time
     it's true that I attack Romulans
     I plan to attack Romulans
     hypothetically, I attack Romulans when I see them

My English translations necessarily include tense, but the Klingon
provides absolutely no information about when any action I might have
taken occurs. All you do is add the time context—it does not change the
above meanings in any way. The aspect doesn't hook up with the time
context to tell you when, relative to the time context, the action
happens; the action happens exactly when the time context says. It just
happens and is completed, or it happens continuously, or it happens
not-completedly and not-continuously (possibly generally, possibly
habitually, possibly hypothetically, possibly in some other way).

-- 
David Trimboli
http://www.trimboli.name/