<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 9/18/2020 9:59 AM, mayqel qunen'oS
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAP7F2c++RZ3-H3MEZNfcqGCoFpbQ21_uJTn1dZoMQNUOBH-q3w@mail.gmail.com">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">SuStel:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite" style="color: #000000;">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">romuluSnganpu'mo' latlh DuH luHutlh romuluSngan.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">hmm.. Daj, 'a qay'law' vay';
jatlh mu'tlhegh wa'DIch: "the romulans caused themselves to lack any
other options". mu'tlheghvam wInuDjaj: wa' ghom tu'lu', 'op
romuluSngan yugh ghomvam, 'ej vangmo' ghomvam romuluSnganpu', tagha'
latlh DuHmey HutlhchoH ghomvam romuluSnganpu'.</pre>
</blockquote>
<p>*shrug* Could it be interpreted as two distinct groups of
Romulans? In isolation, sure. In context, probably not. If you're
talking about a story in which a group of Romulans did this, then
did that, then squandered their remaining alternatives, if I say <b>romuluSnganpu'mo'
latlh DuH luHutlh romuluSngan, </b>it's pretty clear that the
first and last instance of the word refer to the same group. If
you still can't get past that, you can add <b>-vam</b> to the
second instance.</p>
<p>Your use of <b>ghomvam romuluSnganpu'</b> doesn't make sense. Do
you mean <b>romuluSngan ghomvam</b><i> This group of Romulans?</i><br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAP7F2c++RZ3-H3MEZNfcqGCoFpbQ21_uJTn1dZoMQNUOBH-q3w@mail.gmail.com">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">'ej DaH {romuluSnganpu'mo' latlh DuH luHutlh romuluSngan} mu'tlhegh
wInuDjaj:</pre>
</blockquote>
<p>I believe you are misusing <b>-jaj.</b> It's not used to suggest
a course of action; it's used to express a wish or desire. <b>DaH
mu'tlhegh wInuDjaj</b> means <i>Now ma</i><i>y it be that we
examine the sentence.</i></p>
<p>Instead, you should just use an indicative or imperative
sentence. <b>DaH mu'tlhegh wInuD</b><i> Now we examine the
sentence</i> (Cf. <b>DaH matlhutlh</b><i> Let's go get a drink,
Power Klingon</i>) or <b>DaH mu'tlhegh yInuD</b><i> Now examine
the sentence.</i><br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAP7F2c++RZ3-H3MEZNfcqGCoFpbQ21_uJTn1dZoMQNUOBH-q3w@mail.gmail.com">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">mu'tlheghvam vIlaDtaHvIS, cha' yajmeH DuH vItu':
DuH wa': wa' romuluSngan ghom tu'lu'.
DuH cha': cha' romuluSngan ghom tu'lu'.
ghaytan qaSbogh DuH 'ang mu'tlheghvam ngaSbogh lut'e' 'e' vIyaj. 'a
law'bogh yajmeH DuH vIjunmeH, bI'reS {-'eghmoH} lo' vIqelpu'.</pre>
</blockquote>
<p>I know you WANT to talk about <b>-'egh + -moH,</b> but I believe
you've exhausted the available information. You can do it easily
without an object: <b>jIquv'eghmoH</b><i> I honor myself.</i>
There is only slim evidence that you can do it with an object, and
exactly how that works is unclear, assuming it's not an error in
the first place. You are looking for a way to justify what you
want it to mean rather than looking to see whether it actually
means that.</p>
<p>Having run out of evidence to examine, and finding that evidence
to be insufficient to draw any conclusions, I advocate assuming
that it DOESN'T work and translating according to that assumption.
My translation follows that line of thought. If further evidence
comes to light later, we can reevaluate.<br>
</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>