[tlhIngan Hol] joining multible {-bogh} phrases by {je}

De'vID de.vid.jonpin at gmail.com
Fri Jun 10 05:33:56 PDT 2022

On Fri, 10 Jun 2022 at 14:07, D qunen'oS <mihkoun at gmail.com> wrote:

> All of a sudden something came to my mind.
> SuStel:
> > Let's go back to TKD. "In its fullest form, a Klingon sentence repeats
> the noun."
> > The example is yaS legh puq 'ej yaS qIp puq.Okay. Here comes the key
> part, to
> > which I will add my own emphasis: "It is possible, however, to use
> pronouns
> > rather than nouns in the second of the joined sentences."
> > A pronoun wants an antecedent. Not a postcedent. A pronoun wants to
> refer back
> > to a noun that has already been stated. So TKD gives us the example yaS
> legh
> > puq 'ej ghaH qIp ghaH. The ghaH's refer to the previous object and
> subject,
> > and what's more, the object pronoun refers to the previous object noun
> and the subject
> > pronoun refers to the previous subject noun.
> After reading your explanation, I understand what 'oqranD tries to say in
> TKD. So far so good. But doesn't 'oqranD contradict himself with the
> {romuluSngan Sambogh 'ej HoHbogh nejwI'}? According to TKD shouldn't it be
> {romuluSngan Sambogh nejwI' 'ej HoHbogh}? Or are we to understand it as an
> exception/special case?

SuStel alluded to constructions like this earlier:

> I mean, I get it: you're thinking of *legh 'ej qIp* as a kind of compound
> verb. Kind of like *The child [sees and hits] the officer.* And we have a
> couple of canonical examples of doing things like that.
Here, the Klingon is mirroring the English "hunter-killer probe", as though
"hunt-and-kill" were one verb.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.kli.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol-kli.org/attachments/20220610/fa3cc451/attachment-0002.htm>

More information about the tlhIngan-Hol mailing list