[Tlhingan-hol] Time and Type 7 verb suffixes

[Qov]

At 19:16 '?????' 6/16/2012, ghunchu'wI' 'utlh wrote:
>On Jun 16, 2012, at 12:10 PM, "De'vID" <de.vid.jonpin at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > What would be a counterexample to his (and my) interpretation of 
> the sentence from TKD p.40 about the meaning of a verb when a Type 
> 7 suffix is absent is an instance from canon of a verb expressing a 
> perfective or continuous aspect but which does not have the 
> corresponding suffix. And I don't think there's any such example from canon.
>
>I can think of one immediately: {nughoS jagh} from the Conversational
>Klingon battle vignette.

That's a good one, but being in battle it could arguably be said to be clipped.

>(The abundant paq'batlh examples are apparently tainted by having been
>read before publication by a group that did not include SuStel, so I
>won't detail them here.)

yIvaqQo'. But let it be asked: does anyone recall deleting or 
changing aspect suffixes as we worked?  As I said before, I don't 
remember doing it.

I think it's telling that the people who are most influenced by this 
idea are the ones who speak or have studied another language that 
uses perfective aspect. DaQtIq, bISaHtaH'a'?

- Qov