[tlhIngan Hol] to roar in crescendo with verbs

[mayqel qunen'oS]

jIH:
> qanchoHtaHvIS nuv, choHbe'; not choHbej vay'.
> 'a qaStaHvIS yInDaj DISmey, DI'onmeyna'Daj 'agh 'aghqu' 'aghchu'
SuStel:
> I wouldn't have any problem with someone stacking verbs
> this way in speech, but I wouldn't necessarily call it grammatical

I'm afraid I can't understand this.

In the {DI'onmeyna'Daj 'agh 'aghqu' 'aghchu'} sentence, the
{DI'onmeyna'Daj} is the object of the {'agh}, and the subject of {'agh} is
an omitted {vay'}. Can't the following verbs {'aghqu'}/{'aghchu'} have an
omitted {DI'onmeyna'Daj}/{vay'} as object/subject?

I understand the reasoning why just writing {qaStaHvIS yInDaj DISmey,
DI'onmeyna' 'aghtaH} is better, but I can't understand why the original
sentence could be considered ungrammatical. I'm wondering whether there's
something I'm missing regarding omitting subjects/objects.

-- 
Dana'an
https://sacredtextsinklingon.wordpress.com/
Ζεὺς ἦν, Ζεὺς ἐστίν, Ζεὺς ἔσσεται· ὦ μεγάλε Ζεῦ
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.kli.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol-kli.org/attachments/20220218/a8a21b73/attachment-0002.htm>