<div dir="ltr"><div dir="auto">SuStel:<div dir="auto">> Your trouble comes about because in English (I dunno about Greek) then can</div><div dir="auto">> be used as a coordinating conjunction when it means next. The phrase and then</div><div dir="auto">> is basically a conjunction, so you want to put it before anything else.</div><div dir="auto">> But in Klingon. <b>ghIq</b> is an adverbial, not a conjunction,
so you mustn't expect it to <br></div><div dir="auto">> obey the grammar of English <i>and
then.</i></div><div dir="auto">charghwI':</div><div dir="auto">> The “and then” sequence phrase you want is primarily useful to sequence two</div><div dir="auto">> things that occur within the same boundaries of duration used by the</div><div dir="auto">> sentence, as in “Monday, we acquired the ship and then the war started.” Both</div><div dir="auto">> happened on Monday, but we acquired the ship before the war started.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">When I was writing the initial post, I couldn't understand what it was exactly which made the {povjaj ghIq taghpu' noH} seem ugly.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div>But reading your comments, I understood what was going on. Indeed you're right; in English -as well as in Greek- the "then" is usually heard/meant as "and then". So, in the {povjaj ghIq taghpu' noH}, I was reading/understanding "On Tuesday, and then the war started".</div><div><br></div><div>SuStel:</div><div>> If you think about <b>ghIq</b> as meaning "the thing that
happened next was that," <br></div><div>> then you should find no problem imagining
a time expression before it. <b>povjaj <br></b></div><div><b>> ghIq taghpu' noH</b><i> On
Tuesday, the thing that happened next was that <br></i></div><div><i>> the war started.</i></div><div><i><br></i></div><div>Yes, indeed; this solves the problem. Thanks!</div><div><br></div><div>charghwI':</div><div>> Okrand has clearly stated that in many cases one sentence <br></div><div>> in English would be split up into two or more sentences in Klingon.</div><div><br></div><div>I can understand that; I know that the way Klingon handles something which is difficult/complex is by breaking it down into smaller/easier sentences. And it's something I usually do too, since almost anything which goes into my website is pretty complex, which needs some serious recasting in order to be able to become a Klingon sentence.</div><div><br></div><div>But there are cases, in which for a number of reasons, you can't rephrase..</div><div><br></div><div>It's easy to say "rephrase" whenever you're dealing with a single sentence one has written in a post inquiring about grammar. But assume you're writing a looong text.. Perhaps you've already written four sentences "of the same kind" in a row, and you want the next sentence to be different, so that the reader won't be bored/irritated by seeing let's say six sentences in a row, each going like:</div><div><br></div><div>adverb - verbbogh 'ej verbbogh noun - verb - meH'ed noun</div><div><br></div><div>There are times you just can't rephrase, and I think that in such cases, it is necessary for one to know every alternative valid option.<br></div><div><br></div><div dir="auto"><div data-smartmail="gmail_signature" dir="auto">--<br>Dana'an <br><a href="https://sacredtextsinklingon.wordpress.com/" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://sacredtextsinklingon.wordpress.com/</a><br>Ζεὺς ἦν, Ζεὺς ἐστίν, Ζεὺς ἔσσεται· ὦ μεγάλε Ζεῦ</div></div></div>
</div>