[tlhIngan Hol] {-Daq} and {-bogh} and {Sumbogh} and {Hopbogh}

[SuStel]

On 2/3/2022 7:35 AM, mayqel qunen'oS wrote:
> This thread is slowly but steadily turning into a nightmare.
>
> SuStel:
>> Yes, you can use other type 5 suffixes on the head noun,
>> provided those suffixes apply in the main sentence, not the relative clause.
> I found this from the paq'batlh:
>
>> vaj matlhutlhjaj
>> ghe'torDaq ghaHtaHbogh vavwI' wIquvmoHjaj
>> Heghbogh loDnI'wI' wIquvmoHjaj!
>> Let us drink then
>> To my father in Gre'thor
>> And the brother I once had.
> Here the {-Daq} obviously refers to the {ghaHtaHbogh vavwI'}. (there's
> an {-'e'} missing from the {vavwI'}, but that's not the problem right
> now).
>
> The way I understand what's being said in this thread so far, is that
> the translation of {ghe'torDaq ghaHtaHbogh vavwI' wIquvmoHjaj} isn't
> "may we honor my father who's in hell", but rather "may we honor in
> hell, my father who's somewhere unspecified". I get the meaning that
> the speaker says "we're in hell, and with us being there, may we honor
> my father who's somewhere unspecified".

This is not a "ship in which I fled" problem. The relative clause is 
*ghe'torDaq ghaHtaHbogh vavwI'* (missing an *-'e'*) /my father who is in 
Grethor./ The head noun is *vavwI'.* The locative is internal to the 
relative clause. The main clause is *X wIquvmoHjaj*/May we honor X./


> Also again from the paq'batlh:
>
>> qeylISvaD jach 'ej beyDaj luqImmo'
>> yuQDaq ghaHtaHbogh Hoch tlhIngan'e'
>> Qomqa' Hoch Qo'noS nuvpu'
>> All of Kronos trembled once more,
>> For every Klingon on the planet
>> Followed her cry for Kahless.
> Again here the {-Daq} refers to the {ghaHtaHbogh Hoch tlhIngan'e'},
> although I'm not quite sure how this entire line is supposed to fit in
> with the lines above and below it.

This is also not a "ship in which I fled" problem. The relative clause 
is *yuQDaq ghaHtaHbogh Hoch tlhIngan'e'*/every Klingon who is on the 
planet/. The head noun is *Hoch tlhIngan'e'. *The locative is internal 
to the relative clause. The main sentence is *beyDaj luqImmo' X*/because 
X paid attention to her cry./

The lines are enjambed, which makes understanding the syntax a little 
tricky. Read it like this:

/She screamed for Kahless, and because every Klingon who was on the 
planet paid attention to her cry, all the people of Kronos experienced 
an earthquake again./


> With all these being said, returning to the original sentence..
>
> qa'naDa'Daq Sumbogh 'amerI'qa' mIl'oDmey tu'lu'
> at canada where america is near there are bears
>
> I still can't see why one alternate translation couldn't be as well
> "At Canada which is being neared by America there are bears". Yes, the
> English translation is weird. But I was under the impression, that in
> a {-bogh} clause the head noun can be marked not only by an {-'e'} but
> by other type-5 suffixes too. I don't know if this impression of mine
> is actually correct, but perhaps this impression is the root of my
> misunderstanding.

Here are the possible valid interpretations, with relative clauses 
bracketed:

*qa'naDa'Daq [Sumbogh 'amerI'qa' mIl'oDmey] tu'lu'
*/In Canada, there are American sabre bears that are nearby
/The head noun of the relative clause is *'amerI'qa' mIl'oDmey.*
//

*[qa'naDa'Daq Sumbogh 'amerI'qa' mIl'oDmey] tu'lu'
*/There are American sabre bears that are near Canada.
/The head noun of the relative clause is *'amerI'qa' mIl'oDmey.*

Klingon relative clauses are restrictive. That is, the narrow the sense 
of the head noun of the clause, changing its nature. /Pick the card that 
is red, not the card that is white/ has restrictive relative clauses, as 
the clauses restrict the type of card I'm talking about to specific colors.

What you're trying to do is use nonrestrictive relative clauses. 
Nonrestrictive clauses describe the head noun as an aside, adding 
additional information without changing the nature of the head noun. /I 
handed her my business card, which was white/ is a nonrestrictive 
clause, because the fact that it is white does not restrict exactly 
which business card I'm talking about. Nonrestrictive clauses are 
usually set off parenthetically by commas.

You're trying to use a nonrestrictive relative clause in the Klingon. 
You're trying to say, /In Canada, which is near America, there are 
bears./ That's a nonrestrictive clause, and Klingon doesn't do those.

You frequently splice parenthetical comments into your texts, but we 
don't usually see Klingon texts doing this, so it's hard to advise you. 
The easiest way to conform to known Klingon style is not to include 
these parenthetical comments in the middle of sentences, but to break 
them out into sentences of their own. *qana'Da'Daq mIlloDmey tu'lu'. 
'amerI'qa'Daq Sum qana'Da'.* If you absolutely must include 
parenthetical, nonrestrictive notes, set them off by commas or other 
punctuation and keep them separate from the syntax of the main sentence. 
*qana'Da'Daq — 'amerI'qa'Daq Sum qana'Da' — mIlloDmey tu'lu'.* But I 
don't recommend doing this if you want to stick to known Klingon style.

-- 
SuStel
http://trimboli.name
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.kli.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol-kli.org/attachments/20220203/0fac6e4c/attachment-0015.htm>