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

SuStel sustel at trimboli.name
Mon Aug 22 06:40:23 PDT 2016

On 8/22/2016 9:16 AM, Lieven wrote:
> Am 22.08.2016 um 15:04 schrieb SuStel:
>> Your use of aspect has been turning into tense lately. Be careful!
> 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. Omitting an 
aspect suffix has a specific, anti-aspect meaning.

>> ago. *ben law' */dog/ *vIghaj* /many years ago I had a dog. /On the
>> other hand, the aspect suffix on *vIpongta'* is appropriate.
> Although it could also be omitted: Using the -ta' suffix, it means 
> that you have given the name to the dog, is was the action of labeling 
> the name that is completed. Without the suffix, it means that you were 
> naming your dog like this constantly.

I said the aspect suffix was appropriate, because his meaning in this 
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.

> As a different topic (maybe someone else said before) I would suggest 
> you use {targh} to talk about your dog, even though it's not a targ. 
> It makes you think more in Klingon when writing (and it's easier to 
> read for others as well - a "g" without "h" just looks unusual)

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./


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.kli.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol-kli.org/attachments/20160822/51d7a5a0/attachment-0004.htm>

More information about the tlhIngan-Hol mailing list