<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 2/25/2019 10:55 PM, Daniel Dadap
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:4EE75841-29C1-4CB9-A95D-1E33D6424084@dadap.net">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">I think part of my resistance to fully embracing aspect markers as non-optional (don’t get me wrong, I do think you’re likely right that they’re not optional) comes from my own personal philosophical attraction to the idea of Klingon generally communicating the needed information, and not more and not less. My own take on aspect markers had been similar to what charghwI' was describing: that the suffixes could be omitted if it wasn’t important for the purposes of the particular utterance at hand to indicate aspect. Clipped Klingon certainly makes even verb prefixes optional, so I’d imagine that at least Clipped Klingon would be another exception to the “usually”.</pre>
</blockquote>
<p>De'vID gives a better answer to this than I could have; I'll let
it stand for most of my answer here.</p>
<p>As for Klingon not communicating more or less than the required
information, that's just not true. Klingon has known redundancies
— using explicit plural suffixes when verb prefixes make them
inevitable; using <b>-Daq</b> on a the object of a verb with a
locative meaning; words like <b>HIja'/HISlaH, joH/jaw, qIt/DuH</b>
with apparently identical meaning; saying <b>HIja'/ghobe'</b> as
well as repeating the question as a statement (CK). Clipped
Klingon never seems to omit any suffixes, except <b>-'e'</b> at
the end of a copula. It has optional figures of speech, like using
<b>rIntaH</b> to indicate <b>-ta'</b> with a sense of finality.<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>