[108642] in tlhIngan-Hol
Re: [tlhIngan Hol] to qaStaHvIS or not to qaStaHvIS
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (mayqel qunenoS)
Wed Dec 28 08:17:43 2016
X-Original-To: tlhingan-hol@lists.kli.org
In-Reply-To: <7fa54c5d-7ece-2b84-dfaf-dc3abfa47886@trimboli.name>
From: mayqel qunenoS <mihkoun@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Dec 2016 15:17:39 +0200
To: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
Reply-To: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
Errors-To: tlhingan-hol-bounces@lists.kli.org
--===============3255609600786062571==
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=f403045dafb60da10d0544b7cb72
--f403045dafb60da10d0544b7cb72
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
I realize where my confusion lies..
I don't know the difference between a time span, and a time stamp. So far,
I believed that these two are the same.
So, what is the difference between them ? I know that a time span is a
period of time (2 seconds, 4 minutes, 6 hours, 7 days, 10 months, 12 years,
14 centuries, etc).
But what is a time stamp, and how is it any different from a time span ?
qunnoH jan puqloD
ghoghwIj HablI'vo' vIngeHta'
On 28 Dec 2016 3:00 pm, "SuStel" <sustel@trimboli.name> wrote:
> On 12/28/2016 6:34 AM, mayqel qunenoS wrote:
>
> When we say {DaSjaj mavum}, the {qaStaHvIS} is unnecessary. Why ? For
> two reasons: First, because there is no direct need to specify that
> during the entire day we will be working.
>
>
> *qaStaHvIS DaSjaj* *mavum* doesn't say you're working for an entire
> Monday. It says we work during Monday. We might work for one minute or one
> hour or eight hours or twenty-four hours.
>
> if we are answering to the question:
> "on monday do you want to grab a coffee?" then we can answer {ghobe',
> qaStaHvIS DaSjaj mavum}. It is not that the {ghobe', DaSjaj mavum} is
> wrong; it is only that it doesn't carry the punch of saying "no,
> during monday we work".
>
>
> *DaSjaj mavum* would be used to point to a calendar to show why we can't
> go for coffee that day. *qaStaHvIS DaSjaj mavum* would be used to set the
> context that Monday is ongoing, and then work happened.
>
> But when we say {qaStaHvIS wa'maH DIS maSuv} for "during ten years we
> are fighting", the {qaStaHvIS} is necessary because we obviously want
> to convey, that the event of "our fighting" takes place over the
> period of a large time span.
>
>
> No, the *qaStaHvIS* is necessary because *wa'maH DIS* is not a time stamp.
>
> Since we want to convey the "during"
> aspect, then obviously the {qaStaHvIS} is necessary. If we didn't use
> it, then perhaps the reader/listener could be left to wonder: "did
> they fight during the entire time-span ?".
>
>
> Without it the reader/listener would be left wondering what that *wa'maH
> DIS* was doing in the sentence. Is it an object? What's its grammatical
> role? *wa'maH DIS* does not mean *for ten years;* that *for* is the
> *qaStaHvIS.* w*a'maH DIS* means only *ten years.*
>
> Now, perhaps there is an additional reason.. if we just wrote: {wa'maH
> DIS maSuv}, then the feeling that I get from this sentence is that we
> have a {wa'maH DIS} which is very "independent/out of the
> blue/undetermined/undescribed". And perhaps, here is the problem with
> big periods of time requiring the {qaStaHvIS}; one can understand if
> we just say {po'}, {DaSjaj}. {DaSjaj, povjaj je}. These are small time
> spans.
>
>
> Your feeling is correct but it's not because of the size of the time span.
> It's because a time span is not a time stamp.
>
> And then we have the canon example of voragh:
> {qaStaHvIS wa' ram loS SaD Hugh SIjlaH qetbogh loD}
> 4,000 throats may be cut in one night by a running man
>
> Here the {qaStaHvIS} is essential in order to differentiate between an
> event happening "during a night", and an event happening "one night".
>
>
> Which works because *wa' jaj* *one day* works in the same way as it does
> in English: as a time stamp. We see this in the proverb *wa' jaj 'etlh
> 'uchchoHlaH tlhIngan puqloD; jajvetlh loD nen moj.* This is a time stamp.
> Don't think of *wa' jaj* as a time period, like *cha' jaj* or *wej jaj,*
> think of it as "one of those days I can point to on the calendar," or "this
> day, not that day."
>
> However, a final question comes to mind: "could we have it as rule,
> that when something happens during a small period of time then the
> {qaStaHvIS} is always unnecessary" ?
>
>
> No.
>
> --
> SuStelhttp://trimboli.name
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> tlhIngan-Hol mailing list
> tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org
> http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org
>
>
--f403045dafb60da10d0544b7cb72
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"auto">I realize where my confusion lies..<div dir=3D"auto"><br>=
</div><div dir=3D"auto">I don't know the difference between a time span=
, and a time stamp. So far, I believed that these two are the same.</div><d=
iv dir=3D"auto"><br></div><div dir=3D"auto">So, what is the difference betw=
een them ? I know that a time span is a period of time (2 seconds, 4 minute=
s, 6 hours, 7 days, 10 months, 12 years, 14 centuries, etc).</div><div dir=
=3D"auto"><br></div><div dir=3D"auto">But what is a time stamp, and how is =
it any different from a time span ?<br><br><div data-smartmail=3D"gmail_sig=
nature" dir=3D"auto">qunnoH jan puqloD<br>ghoghwIj HablI'vo' vIngeH=
ta'<br></div></div></div><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br><div class=3D"g=
mail_quote">On 28 Dec 2016 3:00 pm, "SuStel" <<a href=3D"mailt=
o:sustel@trimboli.name">sustel@trimboli.name</a>> wrote:<br type=3D"attr=
ibution"><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;borde=
r-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
=20
=20
=20
<div bgcolor=3D"#FFFFFF" text=3D"#000000">
<div class=3D"m_4573484805014920448moz-cite-prefix">On 12/28/2016 6:34 =
AM, mayqel qunenoS
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type=3D"cite">
<pre>When we say {DaSjaj mavum}, the {qaStaHvIS} is unnecessary. Why =
? For
two reasons: First, because there is no direct need to specify that
during the entire day we will be working.</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
<p><b>qaStaHvIS DaSjaj</b> <b>mavum</b> doesn't say you're work=
ing
for an entire Monday. It says we work during Monday. We might work
for one minute or one hour or eight hours or twenty-four hours.<br>
</p>
<br>
<blockquote type=3D"cite">
<pre>if we are answering to the question:
"on monday do you want to grab a coffee?" then we can answer {gho=
be',
qaStaHvIS DaSjaj mavum}. It is not that the {ghobe', DaSjaj mavum} is
wrong; it is only that it doesn't carry the punch of saying "no,
during monday we work".</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
<p><b>DaSjaj mavum</b> would be used to point to a calendar to show
why we can't go for coffee that day. <b>qaStaHvIS DaSjaj mavum</b=
>
would be used to set the context that Monday is ongoing, and then
work happened.<br>
</p>
<br>
<blockquote type=3D"cite">
<pre>But when we say {qaStaHvIS wa'maH DIS maSuv} for "durin=
g ten years we
are fighting", the {qaStaHvIS} is necessary because we obviously want
to convey, that the event of "our fighting" takes place over the
period of a large time span.</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
No, the <b>qaStaHvIS</b> is necessary because <b>wa'maH DIS</b> is
not a time stamp.<br>
<br>
<blockquote type=3D"cite">
<pre>Since we want to convey the "during"
aspect, then obviously the {qaStaHvIS} is necessary. If we didn't use
it, then perhaps the reader/listener could be left to wonder: "did
they fight during the entire time-span ?".</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
<p>Without it the reader/listener would be left wondering what that
<b>wa'maH DIS</b> was doing in the sentence. Is it an object?
What's its grammatical role? <b>wa'maH DIS</b> does not mean =
<i>for
ten years;</i> that <i>for</i> is the <b>qaStaHvIS.</b> w<b>a'm=
aH
DIS</b> means only <i>ten years.</i><br>
</p>
<br>
<blockquote type=3D"cite">
<pre>Now, perhaps there is an additional reason.. if we just wrote: {=
wa'maH
DIS maSuv}, then the feeling that I get from this sentence is that we
have a {wa'maH DIS} which is very "independent/out of the
blue/undetermined/undescribed"<wbr>. And perhaps, here is the problem =
with
big periods of time requiring the {qaStaHvIS}; one can understand if
we just say {po'}, {DaSjaj}. {DaSjaj, povjaj je}. These are small time
spans.</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
<p>Your feeling is correct but it's not because of the size of the
time span. It's because a time span is not a time stamp.<br>
</p>
<br>
<blockquote type=3D"cite">
<pre>And then we have the canon example of voragh:
{qaStaHvIS wa' ram loS SaD Hugh SIjlaH qetbogh loD}
4,000 throats may be cut in one night by a running man
Here the {qaStaHvIS} is essential in order to differentiate between an
event happening "during a night", and an event happening "on=
e night".</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
<p>Which works because <b>wa' jaj</b> <i>one day</i> works in the
same way as it does in English: as a time stamp. We see this in
the proverb <b>wa' jaj 'etlh 'uchchoHlaH tlhIngan puqloD;
jajvetlh loD nen moj.</b> This is a time stamp. Don't think of =
<b>wa'
jaj</b> as a time period, like <b>cha' jaj</b> or <b>wej jaj,</=
b>
think of it as "one of those days I can point to on the calendar=
,"
or "this day, not that day."<br>
</p>
<br>
<blockquote type=3D"cite">
<pre>However, a final question comes to mind: "could we have it =
as rule,
that when something happens during a small period of time then the
{qaStaHvIS} is always unnecessary" ?</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
No.
<pre class=3D"m_4573484805014920448moz-signature" cols=3D"72">--=20
SuStel
<a class=3D"m_4573484805014920448moz-txt-link-freetext" href=3D"http://trim=
boli.name" target=3D"_blank">http://trimboli.name</a></pre>
</div>
<br>______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
tlhIngan-Hol mailing list<br>
<a href=3D"mailto:tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org">tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org</a=
><br>
<a href=3D"http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org" rel=3D"n=
oreferrer" target=3D"_blank">http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.<wbr>cgi/tlhinga=
n-hol-kli.org</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div></div>
--f403045dafb60da10d0544b7cb72--
--===============3255609600786062571==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
_______________________________________________
tlhIngan-Hol mailing list
tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org
http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org
--===============3255609600786062571==--
