<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 5/16/2018 2:01 AM, Ed Bailey wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CABSTb1co+WKXUt7w+k=6zUjotLCMNfZ+iM0PcOBqG30HQP_6pA@mail.gmail.com">On
Tue, May 15, 2018 at 9:42 PM, SuStel <span dir="ltr"><<a
href="mailto:sustel@trimboli.name" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">sustel@trimboli.name</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF"><span class="">
<div class="m_-6973203489833478696moz-cite-prefix">On
5/15/2018 8:37 PM, Ed Bailey wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"> For instance, <b>ghItlhvam
mughlu'meH laH chavlu'pu'be'</b> as a way of saying "No
one has figured out how to translate this manuscript."<br>
</blockquote>
</span></div>
</blockquote>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF"><span class=""> <br>
</span>
<p>This says "One has not achieved this manuscript's ability
in order that one translates." That is, the manuscript has
an ability to translate something (not itself). Another
reading, making the purpose clause attach to <b>chav</b>
instead of <b>laH,</b> would be <i>In order that one
translates this manuscript, one has not achieved the
ability.</i> This is close to what you want, but look
closely at the grammar. And look also at <a
href="http://klingonska.org/canon/1998-01-18b-news.txt"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">this post</a> by
Okrand, wherein he tries to resolve the problem of applying
purpose clauses to negative statements by avoiding the
problem altogether. (Did you carefully try not to achieve
the ability, so that you could translate the manuscript?)<br>
</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div>Your first translation assigns one of many possible genitive
relations between <b>ghItlhvam</b> and <b>laH</b>, but I can't
fault you for interpreting it differently than I intended since
I proposed the example so you could pick it apart and we can
discuss how the grammar works. However, it would be more
neutral, if unidiomatic, to say "ability for one to translate of
this manuscript" </div>
</blockquote>
<br>
<p>I'm going to remove the negative, to avoid the negative <b>-meH</b>
problem.<br>
</p>
<p><b>ghItlhvam mughlu'meH, laH chavlu'pu'<br>
</b><i>In order that one translates this manuscript, one has
achieved the ability.<br>
</i></p>
<p><b>[N1:ghItlhvam] [N2:mughlu'meH laH] chavlu'pu'<br>
</b><i>One has achieved this manuscript's ability for one to
translate.</i></p>
<p>I don't see any other possible interpretations of this sentence.
What are the many possible genitive relations?</p>
<p>In the first interpretation, the indefinite subject plans to
translates the manuscript. In the second interpretation, the
manuscript has an ability of translation. The <b>-lu'</b> might
screw that up, but at best that makes the interpretation invalid;
it doesn't give someone ELSE the ability to translate the
manuscript, and it doesn't change the manuscript's ability to
translate something into an ability for someone to translate IT.<br>
<b></b></p>
<p> </p>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
SuStel
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://trimboli.name">http://trimboli.name</a></pre>
</body>
</html>