On 10/10/2017 12:00 PM, nIqolay Q wrote:
Just out of curiosity, what kinds of "noun series" modelled along variations of beyHom bey bey'a' would also feel right or wrong to you (and other Klingonists reading this)?

Works for me. I don't think its position in the sentence has any bearing on how it's interpreted.



I don't see these as a spectrum, and these suffixes don't express what I thought of the nouns at the time; they tell what I think of them when I say the sentence. At best I would interpret this as my seeing something someone called a spirit but wasn't, then something I think was a spirit, then a spirit, then something that was definitely a spirit. I'm seeing different things in sequence. But there's no natural interpretation of these as a sequence, so my instinct would be add a conjunction afterward and explain the sequence separately.



Because the sequence is obvious, I could accept this. I would expect this to be received something like "jajlo' (ok) po (all morning, huh?) pov (wow, long time!) tlhom (still going?!) puH DujDaj tI'taH.


Same reaction as with the time stamps. 'awje' (ok) qa'vIn (still going?) wornagh (wow, all that?!) DItlhutlhtaH. But this one really wouldn't make any difference if you conjoined them with je: the sense of sequence is not very strong.

But none of these strikes me as so simply unambiguous as the howl-crescendo. You have to work at interpreting them. Stringing along nouns isn't just a listed sequence; it's a single concept expressed in a sequence of related words. The concept isn't "sequence"; it's "thing that changes in this sequential way."

-- 
SuStel
http://trimboli.name