[242] in tlhIngan-Hol
From the Grammarian's Desk
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU)
Mon Mar 23 19:15:30 1992
Errors-To: tlhIngan-Hol-request@village.boston.ma.us
Reply-To: "Klingon Language List" <tlhIngan-Hol@village.boston.ma.us>
From: Allan C. Wechsler <ACW@YUKON.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>
To: "Klingon Language List" <tlhIngan-Hol@village.boston.ma.us>
Date: Mon, 23 Mar 1992 17:39-0500
In-Reply-To: <9203040735.AA00946@ima.ima.isc.com>
Date: Wed, 4 Mar 1992 02:35 EST
From: krankor@IMA.ISC.COM (Captain Krankor)
[Some lecturing deleted.]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
leSHey jIghitlhtaH DochvamDaq.
"Days-from-now-or-something, I'll continue to write about this.
(the last was my best for an indefinite "later")."
Same problem as above: that DochvamDaq can't be at the end of the
sentence. So:
leSHey DochvamDaq jIghItlhtaH.
I probably would have just used "tugh" instead of leSHey -- not as
precise in meaning, but fairly close and far less confusing. Also,
one could probably have quite a healthy argument about whether -Daq
or -vaD is more appropriate on Dochvam.
I confess surprise that the pabpo' did not flag the word <jIghitlhtaH>
itself. <ghitlhtaH> ought not mean "continue writing" but rather just
"be writing". The misuse (in my opinion -- I'd like a ruling from the
pabpo') comes from a misunderstanding on the writer's part of the word
"continuous" (sec. 4.2.7). The writer focussed on the word "continue",
and assumed that he could express "continuing" in the sense of
"resuming". Now, there already is a position 3 suffix that means
"resume V-ing" -- it's <-qa'>. Wouldn't <jIghitlhqa'> be more correct
than <jIghitlhtaH>?
