SuStel, there is something I would like to ask you, with regards to nouns in apposition. At another thread we discussed the following:

Aurelie:

> yaSvaD qama'vaD taj nobmoH HoD

jIH:

> If I saw this sentence without knowing the

> intented meaning, chances are I would

> understand, that the {yaSvaD} and {qama'vaD} > are nouns in apposition.

> So, I would eventually understand, that "the

> captain gave the knife for the officer and the

> prisoner".

SuStel:

> I agree that apposition might be a strong

> interpretation, but the translation would be

> this: the captain makes the officer, the

> prisoner, give the knife. Apposition means the

> two noun phrases are equated with each

> other. They are not conjoined with an and.

> Here, with apposition, the officer is a prisoner. > If the captain made two separate people, an

> officer and a prisoner, give knives, the

> sentence would be yaSvaD qama'vaD je taj

> nobmoH HoD.

> By the way, watch out with your translation.

> The captain doesn't give the knife to an

> officer or a prisoner, he makes them give

> knives to someone unspecified or general.

So, now let me ask you..

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" ?

qunnoq