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

[mayqel qunen'oS]

charghwI':
> Leaving aside the {nejwI’} I don’t see why your First Question suggestion wouldn’t be allowed,
> though it might be of limited productivity, since whatever else you do, you’ll be better understood
> if {‘e’} goes between the sentence it represents and the sentence it serves as object for. Attempts
> to combine verb conjunctions and SAO might tempt you to compose sentences that would embed
> the sentence represented by {‘e’} within the sentence using it as an object, and even if this isn’t
> considered to be illegal grammar, it won’t be easily understood, and it might be considered annoying.

Ok, thanks for sharing your opinion. I'm not sure about all this
myself, which is the reason I asked in the first place. As always, my
interest in these kinds of questions is to understand how things work,
and what the limits actually are.

And even if the questions of this thread were indeed answered by a
definite "yes, it is correct to construct these kinds of sentences",
it wouldn't be my first choice to actually use them, since they
could/would be confusing to the average reader.

~ Qa'yIn