The two objects of {ghojmoH} are the beneficiary and the topic. You can leave either unmarked if there is only one showing, but if both are there, you can’t leave both unmarked. He stylistically prefers to mark the beneficiary, but it should be fine for me to prefer to mark the topic. In fact, it should be okay to say {tlhIngan Hol’e’ be’nalwI’vaD jIghojmoH.}

On Apr 2, 2019, at 10:53 AM, Lieven L. Litaer <levinius@gmx.de> wrote:

Am 02.04.2019 um 16:36 schrieb De'vID:

record-keeping and historical purposes, but please don't worship pairs
of Klingon-English sentences like they're holy.

THanks for that. It's very interesting, and it confirms something else.
While planning the Miniature thing, I talked to Okrand about the
dictionary and the grammar. Also here, he repeated that TKD is way from
being complete. He added that if he omitted something, it does not mean
that it doesn't exist at all. He also repeated that - what he even wrote
in his introduction - although it sometimes says "always" or "never",
even that should not be takes as holy. It happens very often that a
situation occurs which he did not think about. So if speakers find a
solution that "somehow" makes sense and is understandable, then they
should use it, instead of saying it's not possible to do so, or we don't
know how to. Even breaking rules might be acceptable - think of english
"ain't not" and so on.

The language is alive, and lives from being used. Don't take TKD too
strictly as 100% set in stone. It's only a rough introduction, not a
final law.

--
Lieven L. Litaer
aka the "Klingon Teacher from Germany"
http://www.klingonisch.de
http://www.klingonwiki.net/En/Canon
_______________________________________________
tlhIngan-Hol mailing list
tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org
http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org