As long as it's listing steps, it works for all the numbers, as that's what ordinal numbers are for:

wa'DIch Soj vISop

cha'DIch HIq vItlhutlh

wejDIch jagh vIHIv

ghIq jIQong

First I eat the food
Second I drink the wine

Third I attack the enemy

Then I sleep

qurgh

On Fri, Aug 25, 2017 at 11:19 AM, mayqel qunenoS <mihkoun@gmail.com> wrote:

lieven:

> Yes, indeed. Few lines later it says {ghIq Hegh qanjIt}. (PB p

> 149.

For the noble reason of helping someone who may be reading this thread, and for the selfish reason of helping myself whenever I may read this again in the future, here is the relevant text:

wa'DIch Hegh moratlh

wej SuvwI' SuvtaHvIS

mongDaj DuQlu' 'ej Hegh

ghIq Hegh qanjIt

qeylIS retlhDaq Suv

wa' jagh HoHta' HeghtaHvIS

The interesting thing here, is that we have {ghIq Hegh qanjIt}, and not {cha'DIch Hegh qanjIt}.

"First/at first/initially" {wa'DIch} happens whatever, and "then/subsequently" {ghIq} something also happens.

So, from this, it is clear that {wa'DIch} can be used in the sense of "first/at first/initially etc".

qunnoq

On Aug 24, 2017 2:40 PM, "Lieven" <levinius@gmx.de> wrote:

Am 23.08.2017 um 17:02 schrieb mayqel qunenoS:

 > 2) may' bI'reS bejtaHvIS mon.
 > «First, he watches the battle smiling.»

This is even more confusing. If the {bI'reS} here was meant to be a timestamp, then the klingon sentence should be {bI'reS may' bejtaHvIS mon}. Let alone the fact, that even in this case, without the punctuation we would have the ambiguities discussed at the "First, Molor taunts Kahless" sentence.

No, not neccessary. You can see {may' bI'reS} as the time stamp: "At the beginning of the battle, he watches smiling". WHat I think was that it says "He smiles while watching the bgining of the battle" - and it's the english which does not fit perfectly.

I can't understand this sentence at all. All I get is "First, part of the head.."

It's literally "the head part". It's not a sentence, but a listing, talking about connecting body parts in some ritual. You understand when you see the following lines:
wa'DIch nach 'ay'
cha'DIch ghIv 'ay'
wejDIch burgh 'ay'
loSDIch bIng 'ay'
vaghDIch Dung 'ay'
[...] PB, / p. 102

 > 5) wa'DIch Hegh moratlh.
 > «First, Morath fell.»

I could understand this being the use of {wa'DIch} as a timestamp, as long as this sentence isn't the first of a group of sentences where numbering takes place (is it ?).

Yes, indeed. Few lines later it says {ghIq Hegh qanjIt}. (PB p 149.)

--
Lieven L. Litaer
aka Quvar valer 'utlh
Grammarian of the KLI
http://www.facebook.com/Klingonteacher
http://www.klingonwiki.net/En/Paqbatlh
_______________________________________________
tlhIngan-Hol mailing list
tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org
http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org

_______________________________________________
tlhIngan-Hol mailing list
tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org
http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org

_______________________________________________
tlhIngan-Hol mailing list
tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org
http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org