[tlhIngan Hol] et cetera {latlh je} in reference to nouns or verbs or both

[mayqel qunen'oS]

If someone asked me to describe my understanding of the english "et
cetera/etc", I'd write the following two sentences:

"I like cats, dogs, rabbits, squirrels, etc"
"Whenever I walk, run, travel, do my homework, etc, I listen to music"

In the first sentence, the "et cetera" is used in reference to nouns,
while on the second in reference to verbs.

However, here: https://www.dictionary.com/browse/etc, I read:

----------

etc.
abbreviation

and others; and so forth; and so on (used to indicate that more of the
same sort or class might have been mentioned, but for brevity have
been omitted):
You can leave your coats, umbrellas, etc., at the door.

----------

So, I don't know whether my understanding of the english "etc" was
correct, since I believed that it *could* be used too, in reference to
verbs, while here seemingly/apparently it says that it is used after a
string/sequence of nouns.

But the real matter is what's the case with the klingon {latlh je}; is
it to be used only with reference to nouns, or can it be used in
reference to verbs too?

If I write the following then it's obviously correct:

tlhInganpu', romuluSnganpu', vulqanganpu', latlh je vIpar.
I dislike klingons, romulans, vulcans, etc.

But can I write the following too?

jIqettaHvIS, jIvumtaHvIS, jISeDtaHvIS, jIHaDtaHvIS, latlh je, jIDoy'choH.
While I run, work, drive, study, etc, I become tired.

I know that the klingon {latlh je} is essentially "and others", since
the {latlh} is a noun (so one would expect it to being used only in
reference to nouns..), but I'm wondering whether the {latlh je} can be
considered a "set phrase" something like the {tu'lu'} which we never
write as {lutu'lu'}.

~ Dana'an