[tlhIngan Hol] -lI': intentional or not?

[PICHLMANN Christoph]

The following could best be described as my gut feeling on the issue, as I certainly didn't look up any rules beyond re-reading what Klingonska.org says about -lI' and -taH .
This is what my instinct tells me from my limited experience with klingon. Duj tIvoqtaH after all :-)

>The non-restrictive argument would say there is no difference: the 
>agent's intentions are not described by *-lI',* the speaker is merely 
>describing an action progressing toward a known stopping point. A rock 
>pushed off a cliff by a gust of wind could be said to be *pumlI'* 
>because it is making progress toward the known stopping point of the ground.

I'm with that side.
If there is a *known* ground below, the stone can only pumlI' .
Of course if you don't know how deep it is, and can't see the ground, then pumtaH would be fine - from your point of view the stone might just as well fall forever.
But if we can see the ground and you say "pumtaH" to me, I'd expect the stone to fall through the earth and continue to fall until something intentionally blocks its way.

Hm. Unless you're talking about the stone at this moment right now. Then -taH would be fitting, but you'd not be talking about the whole "stone drops down" but "stone is currently on the way down" situation.
Kind of like knowing the speed of the stone or it's exact location.

Christoph

----------------------------------------------

Message: 7
Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2017 13:19:33 -0500
From: SuStel <sustel at trimboli.name>
To: tlhingan-hol at lists.kli.org
Subject: Re: [tlhIngan Hol] -lI': intentional or not?
Message-ID: <58B31C35.4080000 at trimboli.name>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; Format="flowed"

On 2/26/2017 12:35 PM, Lieven wrote:
> Would there be a difference between a stone falling due to the wind 
> moving it and my intentionally making it drop?

Unless you are intentionally personifying the wind and giving it an 
objective of making the stone hit the ground, the restrictive argument 
would say yes, there is a difference: if you dropped the stone intending 
that its goal is the ground you could say *pumlI'* (or *pumtaH*); if the 
stone fell off a cliff because of a gust of wind, you could only say 
*pumtaH.
*

The non-restrictive argument would say there is no difference: the 
agent's intentions are not described by *-lI',* the speaker is merely 
describing an action progressing toward a known stopping point. A rock 
pushed off a cliff by a gust of wind could be said to be *pumlI'* 
because it is making progress toward the known stopping point of the ground.

-- 
SuStel
http://www.trimboli.name/