On 10/19/2017 3:36 PM, nIqolay Q wrote:
In the right context, or if they're aware of it as a phrase from canon, readers will understand the intended meaning of *romuluSngan Sambogh 'ej HoHbogh nejwI'*. Since Okrand wrote it, we know it's a grammatical expression and that Klingons consider the phrasing stylistically acceptable. But I don't think it's necessarily the /best /way to express that idea, because it can be misinterpreted.
Is it any more ambiguous than the English /Romulan hunter-killer probe?/ Is that a hunter-killer probe that hunts and kills Romulans or a hunter-killer probe of Romulan make? Why isn't it a /hunter-killer Romulan probe?/ Doesn't /hunter-killer Romulan probe/ sound just plain WRONG to you, even though it can't be misinterpreted? Here's why it sounds wrong (there are alternative versions of this): http://dictionary.cambridge.org/grammar/british-grammar/about-adjectives-and... In this scheme, /Romulan/ is type 7 (origin) and /hunter-killer/ is type 10 (purpose). Does Klingon obey those rules? No idea. But when a native English speaker invents the language and translates into it, it's possible that he is unconsciously following those rules. I wouldn't declare this sort of thing solved, but it's worth examining Okrand's possible biases in this light. -- SuStel http://trimboli.name