[tlhIngan Hol] Proper use of adverbial {je}

[De'vID]

On 15 August 2017 at 15:07, nIqolay Q <niqolay0 at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 6:07 AM, mayqel qunenoS <mihkoun at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> maj.
>>
>> Now, lets examine another example:
>>
>> {Su'IH 'ej Suwoch je}
>> You're beautiful and you're tall too
>> You're beautiful and you're also tall
>>
>> Is this considered a proper use of the adverbial {je} ?
>
> Probably not. The examples of adverbial {je} indicate that it's used when
> the verb is the same as a previous sentence but the subject or object is
> different. In your example the verb has changed.

There's a semi-controversial example from SkyBox 2.

{lI'qu' tlhIngan may' taj. not Hub'eghrupHa' lo'wI'. taj DopmeyDaq
nargh cha' tajHom. ghop luQan tajHommey. pe'laH je. moQDaq
DuQwI'Hommey jej tu'lu'. pay' HIvDI' lo'wI' pagh mupDI' QIHchu' bIH.}
"The Klingon battle knife is designed primarily for versatility of
use, so that the user is never caught at a disadvantage. Two small,
secondary blades eject from the knife's sides, providing both a hand
guard and another set of cutting edges. A brutally spiked pommel
fastens the hilt together to provide a damaging surprise attack or
give a devastating backhand stroke."

The relevant part is {ghop luQan tajHommey. pe'laH je.} "[the two
small blades provide] both a hand guard and another set of cutting
edges". At first glance, it does seem like this is a case of {je}
being applied beyond the description in TKD ("they protect the hands;
they also cut"). But this can be explained by interpreting {pe'laH je}
as "they also (in addition to the main blade) cut", which does match
the English translation of "another set of cutting edges".

The paragraph from SkyBox 2 has another oddity, the placement of
{-Ha'} in {Hub'eghrupHa'}. It's looks like a typo for {-be'}.

-- 
De'vID