On 7/14/2016 4:27 AM, De'vID wrote:
On 4 July 2016 at 19:31, SuStel <sustel@trimboli.name> wrote:
On 7/4/2016 9:17 AM, mayqel qunenoS wrote:
p.38 :
{jIDoy'qu'taHvIS jImugh QaQ law' jIghuHqu'taHvIS jImugh QaQ puS} I translate better when I am tired than when I'm awake
I like this a lot ; I don't know if it is acceptable, but I like it.
It's not acceptable. The format of a comparative sentence is A Q law' B Q puS. A and B must be noun phrases. The proverb {QamvIS Hegh qaq law' torvIS yIn qaq puS} suggests the formula may be somewhat more flexible when it comes to what a "noun phrase" is, though. A and B can't be verbs or sentences, but it seems that {V1-taHvIS N1 Q law' V2-taHvIS N2 Q puS} is an acceptable form. The commentary in TKW only says that {-taH} is missing in the proverb.
Given the aberrant grammar, the warning that "in proverbs, however, grammatical shortcuts are not uncommon," and the explanation in TKD that "Klingon verbs ending in Type 9 suffixes (other than *-'a'*/interrogative/ and *-wI'*/one who does, one which does/) always occur in sentences with another verb," I consider this proverb too unreliable to form any conclusions about new grammar. *QamvIS Hegh* and *torvIS yIn* are either unusual noun phrases /(death while standing, life while kneeling)/ without the required other verb, or they're verbal clauses /(dying while standing, living while kneeling)/ which aren't the noun phrases required by a comparative sentence. I would need something far clearer before ever accepting this kind of thing. -- SuStel http://trimboli.name