[tlhIngan Hol] Nouns in apposition

[mayqel qunenoS]

What actually makes me wonder, is when the two noun phrases are equated
with each other and when not.

As we discussed, in Aurelie's example {yaSvaD qama'vaD..} the absence of a
{je} after the {qama'vaD} has the result that the the officer is a prisoner.

However, in the {Qo'noSDaq SoSlI' juHDaq..} example, the absence of a {je}
after the {juHDaq}, doesn't necessarily lead to the two noun phrases being
equated with each other.

I guess, what I'm trying to understand, is whether there is a rule, as to
when the absence of {je} will lead to the equation of the noun phrases with
each other and when not.

Is there such a rule, or is it something which is decided each time based
on context ? Or maybe even on which type-5 noun suffix is actually used ?
Because in Aurelie's example we have a {-vaD}, while in mine we have a
{-Daq}.

qunnoq

On Sep 20, 2017 4:36 PM, "SuStel" <sustel at trimboli.name> wrote:

> On 9/20/2017 9:02 AM, mayqel qunenoS wrote:
>
> Suppose I write the sentence:
>
> {Qo'noSDaq SoSlI' juHDaq qajatlh, latlh be' vImuSHa'}
>
> "At Qo'noS at your mother's house I told you, that I love another woman".
>
> Do you agree with the above translation, or is it, that due to the absence
> of a {je} after the {juHDaq}, the meaning becomes "at your mother's house
> which is Qo'noS I told you, that I love another woman" ?
>
> You could interpret it that way. I don't think the lack of a *je* makes
> the difference. It could also be interpreted as two separate locatives that
> both apply simultaneously, one being of a different scope than another.
>
> In a cavern, in a canyon
> Excavating for a mine
> Dwelt a miner, forty-niner
> And his daughter, Clementine.
>
> In the verse, the locatives *in a cavern* and *in a canyon* are not in
> apposition to each other. The cavern is within the canyon. The subjects of
> the sentence both have appositional pairs: *a miner* = *forty-niner* and *his
> daughter* = *Clementine.*
>
> In your Klingon sentence, it's possible that *SoSlI' juH* is within the
> scope of *Qo'noS.*
>
> If the sentence did have a *je,* the meaning would be different:
>
>
> *Qo'noSDaq SoSlI' juHDaq je qajatlh **I speak to you on Kronos and in
> your mother's home*
>
> Here it's possible that you speak to me in both of those places, but not
> in a single utterance. One day you speak to me on Kronos; another day you
> speak to me in my mother's house.
>
> --
> SuStelhttp://trimboli.name
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> tlhIngan-Hol mailing list
> tlhIngan-Hol at lists.kli.org
> http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.kli.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol-kli.org/attachments/20170920/5abd888d/attachment-0016.htm>