On 6/18/2016 5:30 AM, mayqel qunenoS wrote:
{verenganarvo' naDev pawlaw' (Hat SeHmeH janwIj)}. With the intended meaning being "but the air conditioner, apparently came here from ferenginar".
The greek/english original sentence, wishes to express the "seemingly/apparently" meaning, with regards to "where the a/c came from" ; not with regards to "its arrival".
But when I shoved the {-law'} on the {paw}, the "seemingly/apparently" meaning went on the {paw}. So the klingon sentence took the meaning : "but the airconditioner (seemingly arrived = i.e. perhaps it didn't arrive) from ferenginar)"
*-law'* doesn't only apply to the verb; it applies to the entire sentence. *verenganarvo' naDev pawlaw'pu' Hat SeHmeH janwIj* /my temperature-control device arrived here from Ferenginar—I believe this to be true./ It doesn't say which part of the sentence is uncertain—maybe you're not sure it has arrived here instead of somewhere else; maybe you're not sure it came from Ferenginar; maybe you're not sure it is the air conditioner that arrived; maybe you're not sure it arrived anywhere at all. / /
I can't place the {-law'} on a noun, so my next thought would be : "why don't I use an adverb".
But even if I wrote {chaq verenganarvo' naDev paw (Hat SeHmeH janwIj)}, then again there would be a problem. Since the adverb refers to the verb, then again the meaning would be "perhaps it arrived'. So dead end again.
I would never have interpreted *chaq* in this sentence to refer only to the verb; I'd have applied it to the entire sentence, just like *-law'.* -- SuStel http://trimboli.name