[tlhIngan Hol] qaStaHvIS and perfective

mayqel qunen'oS mihkoun at gmail.com
Mon Mar 23 08:15:40 PDT 2020


Thank you SuStel for taking the time to explain all this. Reading your
reply, I realized many things, which I've ignored before.

But before leaving this thread, I'd like to write some thoughts, on
how I understand the use of aspect on verbs expressing qualities, when
they are used before or after another verb with the {-taHvIS}.

Now, don't misundestand me; I remember that you wrote, that you don't
want to go into another conversation, about what perfective might mean
on verbs expressing qualities. And I'm certainly not trying to draw
you into such a conversation, although - to confess my sin, - I'd
really love to..

But I'd like to write some thoughts, expressing my understanding (or
total lack of..) on this matter.. After all, due to the severe
restrictions, which have been placed in greece due to the coronavirus,
I need to do something since staying indoors can become quite boring..

Anyways..

After reading your comments on the sentence {nyuyorghvo' *colorado*Daq
jISeDtaHvIS vIghro' vIlegh}, I've wondered three things:

1. Do these comments apply for quality verbs as well ?

2. Do these comments apply if instead of the {jISeDtaHvIS}, we had a
duration of time ? e.g. {qaStaHvIS wej rep}, as in the example of my
first message ?

3. How do the conclusions drawn from your comments on the sentence
{nyuyorghvo' *colorado*Daq jISeDtaHvIS vIghro' vIlegh}, influence my
understanding on the sentence {wa'Hu', qaStaHvIS wej rep, jIQuchpu'} ?

As far as questions 1 and 2 go, my answer is "yes", since I can't see
a reason why things would be different with regards to be-verbs, or in
the case where we wouldn't have a {jISeDtaHvIS} but a {qaStaHvIS wej
rep} instead.

So, I come to the sentence of the original post {wa'Hu', qaStaHvIS wej
rep, jIQuchpu'}..

The way I understand this, writing {wa'Hu', qaStaHvIS wej rep,
jIQuchpu'} means that:

"..I'm here today, looking back on the day before. Then, there was a
duration of three hours, and during that period of time I've been
happy.. My happiness didn't last three hours; it lasted a period of
time which is unspecified, but surely less than three hours.."

I've wondered though, what the meaning would become if the same
sentence, was to be interpreted from the "historical presence tense of
english". And I came to the conclusion, that in this case, the meaning
would become:

"..I'm in the yesterday as it's unfolding, in the three hour
time-span, but now my "having been happy" has taken place and has been
completed before the commencement of the three hour time-spam.."

Granted though, there's something strange with the above
interpretation; if my happiness took place before the three hour
time-span and has been completed, then how is it possible that it will
be remaining completed only during that period ? This interpretation,
gives the impression, that after these three hours my "having been
happy", is somehow undone.

Anyways, moving on, another question which troubled me was, what does
writing {wa'Hu', qaStaHvIS wej rep, jIQuch} mean ?

And after reading your comments on the {jISeDtaHvIS} sentence, I came
to the conclusion, that it means one of two things:

If the sentence is to be interpreted from the "looking back on events
of the past" point of view, then it means "yesterday, during three
hours I've been happy from time to time".

And if the sentence is to be interpreted with the "historical presence
tense of english" (or greek), it means that I'm standing in the
yesterday, within the three hour time-span, and within the
moment/moments during which I'm happy.

So the final question arises: How the jay' do I say that "yesterday,
my happiness lasted three hours" ? And the *only* way one can say
this, is by use of the {-taH}: {wa'Hu', qaStaHvIS wej rep, jIQuchtaH}.

Interestingly though, regardless whether the meaning of "yesterday, my
happiness lasted three hours", would be given from
today's-looking-back-point-of-view, or from the "historical present
tense" of english point of view, the klingon sentence would remain the
same, thus leaving things to context to clarify how the story is
narrated.

~ mayqel qunen'oS


More information about the tlhIngan-Hol mailing list