[Tlhingan-hol] nuq bop bom: 'ay' wa'vatlh wejmaH vagh: <potlh QonoS>

[ghunchu'wI' 'utlh]

On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 3:40 PM, Qov <robyn at flyingstart.ca> wrote:
>> If {-taH} here is intended to describe a continual or habitual action
>> rather than a continuous one, I think it's better left off.
>
> If SuStel is reading I'd be interested in his take on this, wrt to his
> "every verb needs an aspect suffix" idea.

I don't intend to put words in his mouth, but what I understand of his
position is that verbs lacking a type 7 suffix are best understood as
describing situations rather than events or processes. However, the
distinction he makes between "perfective" and "perfected" is one I do
not understand completely, nor do I see it as important to my use of
the language.

>> ...I proudly stand by the fake
>> linguistic traditions of Klingons from decades ago.
>
> For a moment I thought you were talking about fake history, but whoa, they
> asked me today in class when I started learning Klingon, and it was the
> *eighties*.  That was decades ago. Back then I handwrote my essays and paid
> someone to type them on a typewriter.
>
>    /
>  /
>  --------
>  --------
>  --------
>         ----------          Qov :-)

SuvwI' jIHbe'ba'. SuvwI'pu' qan tu'lu'be'.

-- ghunchu'wI'