[tlhIngan Hol] combining {-meH} and {-bogh} on {-meH}'ed and {-bogh}'ed nouns

[SuStel]

On 4/27/2022 2:49 PM, D qunen'oS wrote:
> fergusq:
> > There is a simple rule to follow when
> > evaluating {-bogh} clauses: if you remove
> > {-bogh}, the sentence should make
> > sense.
>
> I wasn't aware of this rule. Is this rule given by 'oqranD at some 
> qep'a'/qepHom?

It's not a rule of Klingon; it's a rule of thumb to check the form of a 
relative clause. If you remove the *-bogh,* what you /should/ be left 
with is a grammatical indicative sentence.

-- 
SuStel
http://trimboli.name
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.kli.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol-kli.org/attachments/20220427/76bf6996/attachment-0015.htm>