[tlhIngan Hol] not repeating the 'e' of a sao

mayqel qunen'oS mihkoun at gmail.com
Tue Aug 4 04:47:29 PDT 2020


Searching about what the jay' this "romulan hunter-killer probe"
actually is, I found this:

https://memory-beta.fandom.com/wiki/Klingon_(game)

I didn't have the time nor the patience to read the entire article,
but seemingly/apparently the "romulan hunter-killer probe" is indeed a
"hunter-killer probe which is of romulan design" rather than "a probe
which hunts and kills romulans".

But I don't see how this changes something. Lets leave aside the
{romuluSngan Sambogh 'ej HoHbogh nejwI'}.

First question:

Do we *have* to repeat the object in two different sentences ? If we
want to say "we hunt enemies and we capture them", then do we need to
write {jagh DIwam 'ej jagh DIjon} ? Can't we just write {jagh DIwam
'ej DIjon} ? And if we *can* indeed write the latter, then why can't
we write the following too?

romuluSngan Dujmey Qaw' tlhIngan yo' 'e' luSov 'ej luchaw' tera'ngan
the terrans know and allow that the klingon fleet destroys the romulan vessels

We have the {luSov} which has the object of {romuluSngan Dujmey Qaw'
tlhIngan yo' 'e'}, and then we have the {luchaw' tera'ngan} which has
exactly the same object.

How is this grammatically any different from the {jagh DIwam 'ej DIjon} ?

Second question:

We want to say: "the romulans helped the enemy which the cardassians
hunted and captured". Would it be wrong to write {jagh luwampu'bogh
'ej lujonpu'bogh qarDaSngan luQaHpu' romuluSngan} ? Is there someone
here who will say that this sentence is wrong ?

And since recently it has been shown that the verb of a sao which has
the {'e'} as it's object, can indeed have type-9 suffixes, then why
can't we write the following ?

romuluSngan Dujmey Qaw' tlhIngan yo' 'e' luSovbogh 'ej luchaw'bogh
tera'ngan DIneH
we want terrans who know and allow that the klingon fleet destroys
romulan vessels

How is this grammatically any different from the {{jagh luwampu'bogh
'ej lujonpu'bogh qarDaSngan luQaHpu' romuluSngan} ?

If there is a grammar reason which makes the above sentences wrong,
I'm still waiting to hear it. But unless such an explanation is given,
I see no reason against writing sao's like the ones above.

~ Qa'yIn


More information about the tlhIngan-Hol mailing list