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