[Tlhingan-hol] Time and Type 7 verb suffixes

[David Trimboli]

On 6/15/2012 4:52 AM, De'vID wrote:
> SuStel:
>  > > **Note that whenever Okrand uses -Daq <pro> to describe the location of
>  > > a movable object, he uses {-taH}, whereas whenever he describes the
>  > > location of a permanent object he uses no aspect suffix.**
>
> QeS 'utlh:
>  > Not quite "whenever". Skybox card S27 has {-taH} on a permanent object:
>  >
>  > pa' 'oHtaH vaS'a''e'
>  > The Great Hall is there
>
> Actually, I believe the translation is "This is where the Klingon Great
> Hall is located..."
>
> So I did my convert-to-Cantonese mental check on aspect, and I believe
> this example doesn't contradict SuStel's hypothesis about moveable objects.
>
> Trying to express "the bathroom is there" with a continuous aspect in
> Cantonese didn't work for me (but see below), whereas "this is where the
> Parliament Building is" works fine.  The difference is that a bathroom
> is a fixed location inside a building, whereas the Klingon Great Hall or
> a Parliament Building *is* a moveable object within a city or country,
> even though you might not think of it as one.
>
> When I express "the Parliament Building is (continuous) here", it
> implies that it used to be somewhere else, or may be somewhere else in
> the future.  It's not that the *building* can be moved, it's that the
> *label* "Parliament Building" or "Klingon Great Hall" can be transferred
> from one building to another.
>
> Actually, come to think of it, I *can* say something like "the bathroom
> is (continous) there", if a building is under construction and they have
> one of those temporary toilets.  But the meaning is different with and
> without the suffix.  With a continuous aspect marker, there's an
> implication that the location isn't fixed.
>
> Klingon doesn't have to work the same way as Cantonese, but at least the
> relationship between fixed and moveable locations and continuous aspect
> that SuStel proposed can actually work.

Dajbej!

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