[tlhIngan Hol] Is this correct ?

[mayqel qunenoS]

De'vID, be''etlh, and voragh thank you for replying.

De'vID:
> I can't recall any rule that says you can't have {'e'} as the object of a verb with {-bogh}, but it's ugly.

I agree. The original sentence {jeSlaH ghoj neHbogh nuvpu'} seemed
weird to me too, with my original confusion being whether the {nuvpu'}
could be the subject of the {jeSlaH}, since it was so far away from
it.

be''etlh:
> bIghoj bIneHchugh, bIjeSlaH

Indeed, this is a much better way to convey the intended meaning. Thanks.

voragh:
> You’re both forgetting the rarely-used Type 2 suffix {-qang} “is willing to”

I forgot this too.. Strangely, there are some suffixes which I almost
always forget, however as soon as someone reminds them to me, I
realise how they could solve the problem.

mayqel

On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 5:36 PM, Steven Boozer <sboozer at uchicago.edu> wrote:
> You’re both forgetting the rarely-used Type 2 suffix {-qang} “is willing
> to”.  E.g.:
>
>
>
>   qaja'qang
>   I am willing to tell you  (TKD)
>
>   QaHqang
>   He/she is willing to help.  (KGT)
>
>   Heghqang
>   he/she is willing to die  (TKD)
>
>   HeghqangmoHlu'pu'
>   It made him willing to die.  (TKD)
>
>   vaSvamDaq tuq veng je quvvaD Heghqangbogh SuvwI’ tu’be’lu’’a’
>   Is there nobody in this hall prepared to die for the honor of your tribe
> and city? (PB)
>
> So how about:
>
>
>
>   jeSlaH ghojqangbogh nuvpu'
>
>   those willing to learn can participate
>   (“the people who are willing to learn are able to participate”)
>
>
>
> --Voragh
>
>
>
> From: Elizabeth Faber
>
> I think you are trying to translate the English too directly.  How about:
>
>
> jeSlaH ghojwI'pu'
>
> learners can participate
>
>
>
> That's the cleanest translation I can come up with, and while its not exact
> it would serve most purposes.  If you really want to make it conditional on
> volition, it would be at least somewhat less awkward with -chugh
>
>
>
> ghoj neHchugh jeSlaH
>
> If (he/one) wants to learn, (he/one) can participate
>
>
>
> I like the phrasing better in second person
>
>
>
> Daghoj bIneHchugh, bIjeSlaH
>
>
>
> or
>
>
>
> bIghoj bIneHchugh, bIjeSlaH
>
>
>
> I think these last two convey your sentiment the most exactly without
> sounding terribly awkward in Klingon
>
>
>
> -be''etlh
>
>
>
> On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 11:54 AM, mayqel qunenoS <mihkoun at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Is the following sentence correct ?
>
>
>
> {jeSlaH ghoj neHbogh nuvpu'}
>
> the people who want to learn are able to participate
>
>
>
> mayqel
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> tlhIngan-Hol mailing list
> tlhIngan-Hol at lists.kli.org
> http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org
>