[Tlhingan-hol] KLBC : Sentences as objects

[De'vID]

qun HoD:
>>> {luyu'nIS 'e' lulIj} <they forgot that they needed to question him>

ghunchu'wI':
>> Depending on the exact situation being described, the first one
>> *might* be improved with the suffix {-pu'} on the first verb.

SuStel:
> In most examples I can think of, {-pu'} would not be desired. You're
> describing a need for interrogation, not a need for completed interrogation.
> ghunchu'wI' is probably thinking of "completed needing," but I don't see
> that in the English. There was no interrogation, so there was no completion.
> The fact that it's in the past would be indicated by other context.

Aspect with {'e'} is weird. In TKD 6.2.5, it says that "In complex
sentences of this type, the second verb never takes an aspect suffix
(section 4.2.7)."

It's never been explained why not. Or has it? (I think the
out-of-universe reason may have been a backfit for an error of some
kind?)

But clearly, sticking an aspect marker on the first verb means
something different than sticking it on the second verb. How would one
indicate, for example, that the act of forgetting in the above is
continuous, or completed?

-- 
De'vID