On Wed, Dec 28, 2016 at 9:51 AM, mayqel qunenoS <mihkoun@gmail.com> wrote:

ok, I understand the difference between a time span and a time stamp.

You have not yet demonstrated your understanding. The distinction is in the word "span" -- it represents a measured period of time, with a beginning an an end. In contrast, a "stamp" is like a finger pointing to a spot on a calendar, or on a clock, indicating a specific time. It isn't necessarily an instantaneous *moment*, but it doesn't count the passage of time.

so, applying this distinction in the {qaStaHvIS} discussion, I understand that:

"..when we are using time stamps, the {qaStaHvIS} may or may not be used, depending on the occasion. but when we are using time periods, then the {qaStaHvIS} is absolutely necessary.."

would you agree with the above ?

I do not agree. As soon as you say {qaStaH}, you're making the phrase talk about a duration. It's no longer acting as a time stamp.

and something else. since {DIS vorgh} is a time stamp, would you agree with {Soch DIS vorgh jIQuch} for "the previous 7 years I was happy" ?

I do not agree. The English would usually be "during the previous 7 years". If you are trying to say something else, it is not apparent. You seem to be wanting to focus on a seven year span. That needs a verb to represent the passing of time, and the usual one is {qaStaHvIS}.

-- ghunchu'wI'