<html><head></head><body bgcolor="#FFFFFF"><div>I found it interesting that Marc in TKD says that aspectless verbs might be translated with simple present or as future, but doesn't say that they might be translated as past. I did find one that he did translate with past, Hoch nuH Daqel'a' - did you consider every weapon?</div><div><br></div><div>I also can't find any canonical sentences of the form "[Timestamp in the past] [verb][no aspect suffix]." Evidence against includes, <span class="Apple-style-span" style="-webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(26, 26, 26, 0.292969); -webkit-composition-fill-color: rgba(175, 192, 227, 0.230469); -webkit-composition-frame-color: rgba(77, 128, 180, 0.230469); ">QI'tomerDaq Heghpu' Hoch (in the English translation at least, QI'tomer is being used as a past event not a place).</span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="-webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(26, 26, 26, 0.292969); -webkit-composition-fill-color: rgba(175, 192, 227, 0.230469); -webkit-composition-frame-color: rgba(77, 128, 180, 0.230469); "><br></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="-webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(26, 26, 26, 0.292969); -webkit-composition-fill-color: rgba(175, 192, 227, 0.230469); -webkit-composition-frame-color: rgba(77, 128, 180, 0.230469); ">narghbe'chugh SuvwI' qa' taH may' is translated "if the warrior's spirit has not escaped -- present perfect tense -- even though it's aspectless in Klingon. Not sure what the grammatical difference is between that and nuHlIj DawIvpu', vaj yISuv. </span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="-webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(26, 26, 26, 0.292969); -webkit-composition-fill-color: rgba(175, 192, 227, 0.230469); -webkit-composition-frame-color: rgba(77, 128, 180, 0.230469); "><br></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="-webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(26, 26, 26, 0.292969); -webkit-composition-fill-color: rgba(175, 192, 227, 0.230469); -webkit-composition-frame-color: rgba(77, 128, 180, 0.230469); ">I started to go through the Skybox cards in search of a sentence like that, (they're on qurgh's site) but I kept getting distracted by the random pIqaD and by things like Hub'eghrupHa'. </span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="-webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(26, 26, 26, 0.292969); -webkit-composition-fill-color: rgba(175, 192, 227, 0.230469); -webkit-composition-frame-color: rgba(77, 128, 180, 0.230469);"><br></span></div><div>Does Marc ever use an aspectless verb with a clearly past timestamp?</div><div><br></div><div>- Qov<br><br></div><div><br>Begin forwarded message:<br><br></div><blockquote type="cite"><div><b>From:</b> David Trimboli <<a href="mailto:david@trimboli.name">david@trimboli.name</a>><br><b>Date:</b> 7 June, 2012 6:09:33 PDT<br><b>To:</b> <a href="mailto:tlhingan-hol@stodi.digitalkingdom.org">tlhingan-hol@stodi.digitalkingdom.org</a><br><b>Subject:</b> <b>Re: [Tlhingan-hol] Time and Type 7 verb suffixes</b><br><br></div></blockquote><div></div><blockquote type="cite"><div><span>I've found a couple of phrases in KGT that unquestionably use -pu' as perfect tense instead of perfective aspect. One of them is {nIn Hoch natlhlu'pu'} "all the fuel has been consumed." Another is {Dujmey law' chIjpu'} "has navigated many ships."</span><br><span></span><br><span>I was just skimming, not doing an exhausted check.</span><br><span></span><br><span>-- </span><br><span>SuStel</span><br><span><a href="http://www.trimboli.name/">http://www.trimboli.name/</a></span><br><span></span><br><span>_______________________________________________</span><br><span>Tlhingan-hol mailing list</span><br><span><a href="mailto:Tlhingan-hol@stodi.digitalkingdom.org">Tlhingan-hol@stodi.digitalkingdom.org</a></span><br><span><a href="http://stodi.digitalkingdom.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol">http://stodi.digitalkingdom.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol</a></span><br></div></blockquote></body></html>