[tlhIngan Hol] teH vs {-na'}

[Steven Boozer]

AFAIK Okrand has only used {teH} "be true" twice:

  qeylIS tIghmey'e' DaH tIQoy 
      teH tIghmey 'ej bIH bolIjlaHbe' 
  Hear now, […] The ways of Kahless, 
     For they are true And unforgettable. PB

Note he uses both {teH} and {-na'} in his translation of Shakespeare's Sonnet 116:

  nge'wI' rurQo' bangna'; SIHlu'be'chu'. 
  parmaq choH pagh teHqu', choH tu'DI' lajDaj.

FYI here's the entire text of the {bang bom}:

  yab matlh muvchuqghach Sorgh vay' 'e' vIbotjaj.
  nge'wI' rurQo' bangna';  SIHlu'be'chu'.
  parmaq choH pagh teHqu', choH tu'DI' lajDaj.
  ghobe'! qarbejbogh DoDvam qontaH 'u'
  jevqu'taHvIS muD ral, bejlI' parmaq.
  Qombe'! nISbe' jevwI', 'ej not ruS baq.

  Let me not to the marriage of true minds
  admit impediments.  Love is not love
  which alters when it alteration finds,
  or bends with the remover to remove:
  Oh, no!  It is an ever-fixed mark.
  That looks on tempests and is never shaken.  (Sonnet 116)

--
Voragh
Ca'Non Master of the Klingons


-----Original Message-----
From: Hugh Son puqloD
> On Aug 14, 2019, at 05:26, mayqel qunen'oS <mihkoun at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> {tamghay teH 'oH Hurghchu'ghach'e'}

As I understand it, {teH} is “true” in the sense of truthfulness, not “true” in the sense of genuineness.
_______________________________________________