[Tlhingan-hol] Type 7 verb suffixes (was Re: nuq bop bom: 'ay' wa'vatlh wejmaH vagh: <potlh QonoS>)

[David Trimboli]

On 2/11/2012 2:54 AM, De'vID jonpIn wrote:

> SuStel:
>  > It's not "to eat," it's the exact sentence "I ate." That sentence,
> and no other forms, inflections, or words.
>  >
>  > Prince: Did you take a bite out of this apple?
>  > Snow White: Yes, I ate.
>  >
>  > She wouldn't say that!
>
> loDHomvaD raSDaq naH jengva' lan SoSDaj.  jatlh SoS, <DaH Qu'Hom
> vIchavmeH jImej.  jIcheghDI' naH DaSopnISta'.>

That's perfect tense, not perfective aspect. "You need to have eaten it" 
means eating it at some point prior to "when I return." Points prior are 
tense, not aspect. Perfective refers to "completed," not "prior."

If I were writing that sentence, I'd write {jIcheghpa' naH DaSopnISta'} 
"You need to eat the fruit completely before I return." (I'd actually 
change elements of the whole paragraph.)

> jang loDHom, jatlh, <lu', qaH!>
>
> mejpu'DI' SoS, loQ naH chop loDHom 'ej ghup.  cha'logh chop 'ej ghup.
> wejlogh chop 'ej ghup.  Soj mumDI' par.  nujvo' ratlhwI' tlhIS.
> jengva'vo' veQDaq Soj woD.
>
> chegh SoSDaj.  ghaHvaD ghel, <bISop'a'?>
>
> chay' jang loDHom?  jatlh, <HIja', jISop.>
>
> jangDI' loDHom, lugh'a'?  vIt'a'?

Ah, you've just made my point for me. A child who pulls this trick is 
trying to take advantage of the mother's regular understanding of the 
language. A (naive) mother who hears "I ate the apple" will assume that 
the child ate THE WHOLE APPLE (sans core)—she believes the sentence to 
be in its normal, perfective sense. This is how it would normally be 
interpreted. The child knows this, but decides that HE is going to think 
of it as being in the perfect tense: that prior to that conversation he 
engaged in the act of eating the apple. He is intentionally forcing an 
unexpected, but not literally incorrect, interpretation of the sentence.

In Klingon he might try a similar trick, but not the same one. He can 
take advantage of the fact that Klingon has no articles. If he says {naH 
vISopta'}, does he mean "I ate the fruit" or "I ate fruit"? If he only 
ate a piece, the latter interpretation is correct but the former is not.

Or, in your example above, the child does not specify WHAT he ate. 
That's another way children try to trick their parents. {bISopta''a'?} 
"Did you finish eating?" {HIja' jISopta' . o O ('ach Hoch'e' vISopbe'ta'!)}

Children twisting grammar to trick their parents aren't the best tests 
of one's grammatical understanding. Try that test with honest adults:

1: naHvam yISop!
2: OMNOMNOM... YEEECCHHHH! PTOOIE!
1: naH DaSopta''a'?
2: ghobe'... 'up!

-- 
SuStel
http://www.trimboli.name/