[tlhIngan Hol] As soon as I had tickled the dog

[Lieven]

Am 22.08.2016 um 15:40 schrieb SuStel:
>> Yes, indeed. Basic rule to remember: if in doubt, do not use it :-)
>
> I'd say the basic rule is, if in doubt, ask someone else.

Yes, that is true. But is has become clear that many people use the 
aspect suffix way too often and most of the time incorrectly. Omitting 
this suffix may have a slightly different meaning, but it is "less 
wrong" than overly using it.

> case is clear. Let's not confuse the issue. The aspect suffix should not
> be omitted in this sentence because he's trying to establish a time
> context of many years ago, in which he was in possession of a dog and
> had previously given that dog a name.

{ben law' targh vIghaj. ngugh 'oHvaD ghawran vIpong.}
This sentence is completely correct, without needing any aspect suffix.

I just don't want him to feel the need of using aspect suffixes because 
he is talking about - as you say - "a time context of many years ago".

> I disagree. Use a foreign word if the language has no native word that
> will do. A dog is not a targ, and is not close enough to a targ for
> Maltz to have translated *targh* as /dog./

No need to agree. If we all had the same opinions, this group would be 
boring and senseless. ;-)


-- 
Lieven L. Litaer
aka Quvar valer 'utlh
Grammarian of the KLI
http://www.facebook.com/Klingonteacher
http://www.klingonwiki.net