<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 12/28/2018 6:14 AM, mayqel qunenoS
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAP7F2cJeg0FhSnNS_x2Nf2ZhiWgxjR9530UuoN+xSN754U7LNw@mail.gmail.com">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">SuStel:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">naH jajmeywIj bIQ'a' HeHDaq jIyIt
In my youth I walked on the beach.
My intention here is to imply that I used to walk on the beach;
it was my habit to walk on the beach in my youth
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">jIH:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">If this sentence describes a habit taking place during youth, then
shouldn't the sentence be {qaStaHvIS naH jajmeywIj, bIQ'a' HeHDaq
jIyIt} ?
The way I would understand {naH jajmeywIj bIQ'a' HeHDaq jIyIt}, is
that "in my youth, once I walk on the beach".
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">SuStel:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">The sentence could be interpreted as In my youth I walk on the beach,
but only if you're conceptually casting yourself back in time to those heady
vegetable days.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">
I'm rather confused here..
In your original sentence, i.e. {naH jajmeywIj bIQ'a' HeHDaq jIyIt},
your intended meaning was the stating of an action while conceptually
casting yourself back in time at that moment ? At a moment of a
specific walk on the beach, where a crab bites your foot ? An
action/event which took place only once ?
Or was the intended meaning that while you were young you were
habitually walking on a beach ? i.e. describing an event which was
happening regularly ? But an event you're actually re-living at the
time of the narration of the sentence ?
Or was the intended meaning, the description of a habitual event which
was happening regularly, but without re-living it at the time that the
sentence is spoken ?
</pre>
</blockquote>
<p>The point is that there isn't a single meaning to a verb that
doesn't have a type 7 suffix; it can be interpreted in lots of
ways, depending on the context. You must apply the associated
context to get the correct meaning. Two ways it <i>can't</i> be
interpreted, though, are perfective and continuous.</p>
<p>Look, the rules are just what's in TKD. When an action described
is a completed action, you must use a perfective suffix; you can't
drop it. When an action described is a continuous action, you must
use a continuous suffix; you can't drop it. For everything else,
use no aspect suffix.</p>
<p>Completed or continuous from what point of view? Every sentence
has a point of view that may or may not be the same as the time
context or the speaker's present. <b>wa'leS qaHoHta'</b><i>
Tomorrow I will have killed you</i> takes as its viewpoint a
moment tomorrow after my killing of you. "Place yourself in the
moment after my killing you tomorrow. I shall now describe what
you see: <i>I have killed you.</i>" <b>wa'leS qaHoHtaHvIS</b><i>
</i><b>jImon</b><i> While I'm killing you tomorrow</i> <i>I smile</i>
forces the viewpoint to be a slightly earlier point, still
tomorrow, but during the act of killing you. It's specifically at
the moment I smile. <b>wa'leS qaHoH</b> <i>I will kill you
tomorrow</i> has right now as the viewpoint, and is looking
ahead to a hypothetical action — being hypothetical, it certainly
isn't completed.<br>
</p>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
SuStel
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://trimboli.name">http://trimboli.name</a></pre>
</body>
</html>