[111956] in tlhIngan-Hol
Re: [tlhIngan Hol] Using -ta' during -taHvIS
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (De'vID)
Tue Feb 26 05:48:24 2019
X-Original-To: tlhingan-hol@lists.kli.org
In-Reply-To: <6e67e8bd-6515-a2fc-1b34-2e72bc2d3738@gmx.de>
From: "De'vID" <de.vid.jonpin@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2019 11:48:09 +0100
To: tlhIngan-Hol <tlhingan-hol@kli.org>
Reply-To: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
Errors-To: tlhingan-hol-bounces@lists.kli.org
--===============4060857414446550802==
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000a437c50582c9cbdc"
--000000000000a437c50582c9cbdc
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
On Tue, 26 Feb 2019 at 11:32, Lieven L. Litaer <levinius@gmx.de> wrote:
> Am 26.02.2019 um 10:35 schrieb De'vID:>
> > The sentence used to introduce this restriction in TKD is: {yaS qIppu'
> > 'e' vIlegh}.
> >
> > This sentence didn't appear in Star Trek III, but was something with
> > this grammar actually spoken in the movie which forced Okrand to make
> > this restriction?
>
> Yes: {qama'pu' jonta' neH}
>
> In the first version, it was meant to say "I told you: only the engine".
> The new subtitles of the movie changed to "I wanted to take prisoners".
> Okrand had to backfit the sentence structure, but the suffix {-ta'} was
> on the first verb instead of the second one. So, the rule was set: the
> second verb does not take the aspect suffix.
>
> NB: this is not confirmed, but I think it's obvious.
>
Oh, of course, the one sentence that literally explains most of the weird
arbitrary decisions made in TKD. Why wasn't it the first thing I thought of?
--
De'vID
--000000000000a437c50582c9cbdc
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"ltr"><div dir=3D"ltr"><br></div><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">=
<div dir=3D"ltr" class=3D"gmail_attr">On Tue, 26 Feb 2019 at 11:32, Lieven =
L. Litaer <<a href=3D"mailto:levinius@gmx.de">levinius@gmx.de</a>> wr=
ote:<br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px=
0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">Am 26.02.20=
19 um 10:35 schrieb De'vID:>=C2=A0<br>
> The sentence used to introduce this restriction in TKD is: {yaS qIppu&=
#39; <br>
> 'e' vIlegh}.<br>
> <br>
> This sentence didn't appear in Star Trek III, but was something wi=
th <br>
> this grammar actually spoken in the movie which forced Okrand to make =
<br>
> this restriction? <br>
<br>
Yes: {qama'pu' jonta' neH}<br>
<br>
In the first version, it was meant to say "I told you: only the engine=
". <br>
The new subtitles of the movie changed to "I wanted to take prisoners&=
quot;. <br>
Okrand had to backfit the sentence structure, but the suffix {-ta'} was=
<br>
on the first verb instead of the second one. So, the rule was set: the <br>
second verb does not take the aspect suffix.<br>
<br>
NB: this is not confirmed, but I think it's obvious.<br></blockquote><d=
iv><br></div><div>Oh, of course, the one sentence that literally explains m=
ost of the weird arbitrary decisions made in TKD. Why wasn't it the fir=
st thing I thought of?</div></div><div><br></div>-- <br><div dir=3D"ltr" cl=
ass=3D"gmail_signature">De'vID</div></div>
--000000000000a437c50582c9cbdc--
--===============4060857414446550802==
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
--===============4060857414446550802==--
