<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 7/23/2021 11:36 AM,
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:luis.chaparro@web.de">luis.chaparro@web.de</a> wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:trinity-0e12a02d-ecdf-499a-ac51-5d7ffad007d5-1627054615656@3c-app-webde-bap04">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">
qaStaHvIS wej Hogh ret *Cádiz*Daq maghIQtaH be'nalwI' jIH je.</pre>
</blockquote>
<p>This says <i>During three weeks ago, my wife and I were
vacationing in Cádiz.</i> I suspect you actually mean either <b>wej
Hogh rej <i>Cádiz</i>Daq maghIQtaH be'nalwI' jIH je</b> <i>Three
weeks ago, my wife and I were vacationing in Cádiz </i>or <b>qaStaHvIS
wej Hogh vorgh, maghIQtaH be'nalwI' jIH je</b><i> During the
last three weeks, my wife and I have been vacationing in Cádiz.</i><br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:trinity-0e12a02d-ecdf-499a-ac51-5d7ffad007d5-1627054615656@3c-app-webde-bap04">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">*Cádiz*Daq muvchuq 'atlantIq bIQ'a' *Mediterranean* bIQ'a' je 'ej 'avrI'qa' leghmeH, 'op Daqvo' mIn neH lupoQlu'.</pre>
</blockquote>
<p>This is a little tricky because we don't fully know all the rules
involved, but I think you probably want to use <b>leghlu'meH</b>
to match up with the <b>lupoQlu'.</b><br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:trinity-0e12a02d-ecdf-499a-ac51-5d7ffad007d5-1627054615656@3c-app-webde-bap04">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">'ach reH pa' jIHtaHDI', 'avrI'qa'vo' Sumlaw' je 'ewrop 'e' vIqawnIS.</pre>
</blockquote>
<p>To say that something is <i>near</i><b> Sum</b> to something
else, you use the locative, not the ablative. You did this
correctly earlier. <b>'avrI'qa'Daq Sumlaw' je 'ewrop</b><i>
Europe is also apparently near Africa.</i></p>
<p>I'm not exactly sure why you're expressing uncertainty there with
<b>-law'.</b><br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:trinity-0e12a02d-ecdf-499a-ac51-5d7ffad007d5-1627054615656@3c-app-webde-bap04">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap=""> Do'Ha' 'ewrop lughoSmeH, SuDqu' QIlbogh nuv law'.</pre>
</blockquote>
<p><i>Unfortunately, in order to go to Europe, many desperate people
are very near.</i> I'm not sure that a purpose clause is
appropriate here. The many desperate people are not near <i>in
order to </i>go to Europe.<br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:trinity-0e12a02d-ecdf-499a-ac51-5d7ffad007d5-1627054615656@3c-app-webde-bap04">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">1. Is this sentence correct?: *Do'Ha' 'ewrop lughoSmeH, SuDqu' QIlbogh nuv law'.* Or should I say: *'ewrop lughoSmeH, Do'Ha' SuDqu' QIlbogh nuv law'.*? Actually, *Do'Ha'* modifies the whole sentence, but I'm not sure about how it works in Klingon.</pre>
</blockquote>
<p>I struggle with this as well, but I don't think there's a clear
answer. Can you split one sentence with a subordinate clause? I
dunno.<br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:trinity-0e12a02d-ecdf-499a-ac51-5d7ffad007d5-1627054615656@3c-app-webde-bap04">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">2. Regarding my last post about time context (<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.kli.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol-kli.org/2021-June/017546.html">http://lists.kli.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol-kli.org/2021-June/017546.html</a>): Sorry, but I'm having more problems with this matter than I've expected. Maybe I'm making it more difficult than it is. When I say *pIj pa' maghIQ* I want to say that we often *go* on vacation there, not that we often *went* (imperfective). As I understand it, if someone says *we often went on vacation there* I expect some explanation about why they don't go there anymore or why they have started going there again or something like this. So, if no such explanation comes, we'll interpret *pIj pa' maghIQ* as present, right? And the same goes for the description of the summer weather in this region. (Of course, the sentences about the position of the seas and the cities are not likely to be interpreted as past without further context).</pre>
</blockquote>
<p>If I had no context, I'd interpret <b>pIj pa' maghIQ</b> as a
timeless fact and translate it into English simple present tense <i>(We
often vacation there).</i> If there were more context, like <b>cha'ben
pIj pa' maghIQ,<i> </i></b>I would interpret it as a general
fact that was true as of the mentioned time, and I would translate
it into the simple tense appropriate to that time (in this case, <i>Two
years ago, we would often vacation there</i> or <i>Two years
ago, we often vacationed there.</i>)</p>
<p>That's not to say that a lack of context necessarily implies a
timeless fact. It's just that I wouldn't know any differently if
there were no context.<br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:trinity-0e12a02d-ecdf-499a-ac51-5d7ffad007d5-1627054615656@3c-app-webde-bap04">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">And in a similar way: *Do'Ha' 'ewrop lughoSmeH, SuDqu' QIlbogh nuv law'. nur, yIn qaq je nej. Do'Ha' roD 'ewropDaq ngeDbe' ghu'chaj.* If I wanted to say that many people *risked* (imperfective) their lifes in order to come to Europe, then I would add some temporal context in which this imperfective actions were taking place, like *many years ago* or "during the last two centuries* or something like this. Without further context, the more likely interpretation is present again. Or should I provide some context anyway in order to get the *present* interpretation and, if so, how?
</pre>
</blockquote>
<p>In general, provide context if you care whether your audience
knows when to place a verb in time. If you don't care, you don't
need context.<b> valtIn, tem je yugh bIQSIp HeySel</b><i> The
hydrogen atom consists of a proton and an electron.</i> I don't
care about time context here, so I don't need any, and I don't
expect my audience to be looking for any temporal position. <b>be'
ghaH mara'e'</b><i> Mara is a woman:</i> Likewise, this is a
timeless fact; as long as there is a Mara, she is a woman. <b>HoD
ghaH tlha''a'e' </b><i>Klaa is the captain:</i> Klaa isn't <i>always</i>
the captain, but I can probably depend on my audience to know that
I'm talking about a time when Klaa is captain, so I <i>probably </i>don't
need to give a time context just for that. <b>qagh vISop:</b>
This becomes trickier. Is there a particular time when I eat gagh?
Now? The future? Generally? Always? Sometimes? Context will answer
these questions.<i> </i><b>wa'leS qagh vISop</b><i> I will eat
gagh tomorrow</i> (the future).<b> not qagh vISop</b><i> I never
eat gagh</i> (a timeless fact). <b>naH jajwIj qagh vISop</b><i>
I ate gagh as a youth</i> (a general fact limited in time to my
youth).<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>