[Tlhingan-hol] KLBC: verb-verb SAO

[SuStel]

On 2/1/2016 4:54 PM, John R. Harness wrote:
> I think I am missing a few emails for some reason, to get from qunnoq's
> question to Qov's response.
>
> What I think Qov is pointing out is the use of -choH to solve qunnoq's
> question. For what it's worth, the sentence {taghwI' pabpo' vIghel 'e'
> vImevlaHbe'} seems like a reasonable sentence in that it is grammatical
> and gets the point across. But using -choH to signal the change in the
> verb is more concise (always good for Klingon) and is a fuller
> engagement with the grammar. (I sort of want to say that it is "*more*
> grammatical.") We've got all those suffixes, why not use them to the
> fullest!
>
> I don't want to digress too far into the murky waters of English
> grammar; but,  I will point out regarding qunnoq's original question
> that this is a good example of an area where Klingon and English behave
> differently. Phrases like "I like eating" are made with gerunds -- "eat"
> has been turned into a noun with the -ing ending. Klingon has something
> like this, the seldomly seen -ghach ending. But we don't go throwing
> -ghach around just anywhere. Instead, Klingon requires two
> verbs-that-are-still-acting-like verbs and 'e'. EXCEPT, of course, as
> Qov points out, when we have other suffixes that cover the intended meaning.

This isn't correct. "Eating" in "I am eating" is a (present) participle, 
not a gerund. A gerund would be the "eating" in "Eating is fun." A 
gerund functions a noun; a participle augments a verb.

Klingon {-ghach} is similar to a gerund in that it makes a word function 
as a noun.

-- 
SuStel
http://trimboli.name