On 9/20/2017 9:02 AM, mayqel qunenoS wrote:
Suppose I write the sentence:
{Qo'noSDaq SoSlI' juHDaq qajatlh, latlh be' vImuSHa'}
"At Qo'noS at your mother's house I told you, that I love another woman".
Do you agree with the above translation, or is it, that due to the absence of a {je} after the {juHDaq}, the meaning becomes "at your mother's house which is Qo'noS I told you, that I love another woman" ?
You could interpret it that way. I don't think the lack of a *je* makes the difference. It could also be interpreted as two separate locatives that both apply simultaneously, one being of a different scope than another. In a cavern, in a canyon Excavating for a mine Dwelt a miner, forty-niner And his daughter, Clementine. In the verse, the locatives /in a cavern/ and /in a canyon/ are not in apposition to each other. The cavern is within the canyon. The subjects of the sentence both have appositional pairs: /a miner/ = /forty-niner/ and /his daughter/ = /Clementine./ In your Klingon sentence, it's possible that *SoSlI' juH* is within the scope of *Qo'noS.* If the sentence did have a *je,* the meaning would be different: *Qo'noSDaq SoSlI' juHDaq je qajatlh */I speak to you on Kronos and in your mother's home/ Here it's possible that you speak to me in both of those places, but not in a single utterance. One day you speak to me on Kronos; another day you speak to me in my mother's house. -- SuStel http://trimboli.name