[tlhIngan Hol] One more day

SuStel sustel at trimboli.name
Tue Oct 10 10:09:52 PDT 2017

On 10/10/2017 12:51 PM, nIqolay Q wrote:
>     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.)

Noun qualification suffixes applying to what a participant in the 
sentence is not a complete impossibility, though I don't like it. We've 
seen hints of similar in the verb qualification suffixes. But we haven't 
actually seen anything like this in nouns so far as I know, so no point 
trying to find a way to make it so.

You might construct a similar argument based on aspect suffixes and 
*-ghach:* *SuvchoHghach SuvtaHghach Suvpu'ghach* for something like 
/fight from start to finish./ There's an unmistakable sequence here, but 
it doesn't exactly roll off the tongue. And with this one there's 
actually little point to nominalizing it; just say *SuvchoH SuvtaH 
Suvpu'.* Interpret it with full stops after each word if you must.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.kli.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol-kli.org/attachments/20171010/4fa6fc69/attachment-0004.htm>

More information about the tlhIngan-Hol mailing list