[tlhIngan Hol] A {tu'lu'} out of nowhere

[mayqel qunenoS]

jIH:
> {cha' choQmey naQ tep choQ je bIngDaq}
> at the area below two full decks and the cargo deck.
De'vID:
> That doesn't work either, because only the half utility deck is under
> the cargo deck. Again, what is the grammatical role of {bIngDaq} here?

If we leave aside the intended meaning of the bird of prey poster,
would you accept as grammatically correct the {cha' choQmey naQ tep
choQ je bIngDaq} for "at the area below of two full decks and a cargo
deck" ?

jIH:
> The only way I can make sense of the klingon sentence is as it is
> describing the bop, and saying "there are two full decks (and then)
> under the cargo deck (there is) a half utility deck.
De'vID:
> And just what is wrong with this?

Perhaps my problem has to do with the way I understand the english
translation. Let me put it another way.

The way I understand the english translation, it means that "there is
the cargo deck and then there are 2 full decks and a half utility
deck" (cargo deck --> two full decks & half utility deck)

The way I understand the klingon sentence, it means that "there are
two full decks, then the cargo deck and then the half utility deck"
(two full decks --> cargo deck --> half utility deck)

On Wed, Jul 5, 2017 at 1:01 PM, De'vID <de.vid.jonpin at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 5 July 2017 at 11:52, mayqel qunenoS <mihkoun at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Since I haven't written klingon for a few months, and I have become
>> quite rusty, I started studying some canon sentences.
>>
>> So I came across this sentence:
>>
>> {cha' choQmey naQ tu'lu' 'ej tep choQ bIngDaq lo' law' bID choQ tu'lu'}
>> 2 Full Decks and a Half Utility Deck under the Cargo Deck KBoP.
>>
>> I can't understand the placement of the first {tu'lu'}. If I was asked
>> to translate the first sentence without knowing the translation given,
>> I would write:
>>
>> {cha' choQmey naQ tu'lu'}
>> two full decks there are
>
> "There are two full decks..."
>
>> {'ej tep choQ bIngDaq}
>> and at the area below the cargo deck
>>
>> {lo' law' bID choQ tu'lu'}
>> a half utility deck there is
>
> "... and under the cargo deck, there is a half utility deck."
>
>> Perhaps, alternatively we could have the {bIngDaq} referring to both
>> the two full decks AND at the cargo deck:
>>
>> {cha' choQmey naQ tu'lu' 'ej tep choQ bIngDaq}
>> at the area below two full decks and the cargo deck.
>
> No, that doesn't work, because {'ej} has to join two sentences.
> Furthermore, what is {bIngDaq} doing there?
>
>> But this would make sense if we didn't have the {tu'lu'}, let alone
>> that even without the {tu'lu'} instead of the {'ej} we would need to
>> have {je}:
>>
>> {cha' choQmey naQ tep choQ je bIngDaq}
>> at the area below two full decks and the cargo deck.
>
> That doesn't work either, because only the half utility deck is under
> the cargo deck. Again, what is the grammatical role of {bIngDaq} here?
>
>> The only way I can make sense of the klingon sentence is as it is
>> describing the bop, and saying "there are two full decks (and then)
>> under the cargo deck (there is) a half utility deck.
>
> And just what is wrong with this?
>
> --
> De'vID
> _______________________________________________
> tlhIngan-Hol mailing list
> tlhIngan-Hol at lists.kli.org
> http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org