[tlhIngan Hol] One more day

[nIqolay Q]

On Tue, Oct 10, 2017 at 12:18 PM, SuStel <sustel at trimboli.name> wrote:
>
> Works for me. I don't think its position in the sentence has any bearing
> on how it's interpreted.
>
Same, I figured this was the least-controversial variation that I posted.

> I don't see these as a spectrum, and these suffixes don't express what I
> thought of the nouns at the time; they tell what I think of them when I say
> the sentence.
>
It's interesting that you don't see these suffixes as a spectrum. I thought
it was a good example of a spectrum of something like "increasing belief on
my part that this thing can or should be described by this noun", from
*-qoq* ("obviously not such a thing") to *-na'* ("definitely such a
thing"). That's a good point about how they apply at the time of speaking,
though. (At first I was going to argue that in the right context they could
be taken to mean "what I thought of them at the time", like if they were
contrasted with each other in some kind of temporal sequence, but I think
that's mostly just because I really liked that example and want to salvage
it somehow.)
>
> Same reaction as with the time stamps. *'awje'* (ok) *qa'vIn* (still
> going?) *wornagh* (wow, all that?!)* DItlhutlhtaH.* But this one really
> wouldn't make any difference if you conjoined them with *je:* the sense
> of sequence is not very strong.
>
This is also the example I liked least.

> The concept isn't "sequence"; it's "thing that changes in this sequential
> way."
>
That's a good distinction to keep in mind.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.kli.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol-kli.org/attachments/20171010/bf058b98/attachment-0016.htm>