I think you guys have gone overboard with this thin-ice argument that Klingon adverbials CAN BE TRANSLATED to apply to things other than either the verb (most commonly), or in special cases where the context clarifies WTF you are talking about, nouns. A simpler truth is that your precious, exceptional English translations would only make sense if the English translation had the same context that the Klingon expression did, and if it HAD that context, you would, like the Klingon expression, not need the emphasis you are putting on it. I maintain that adverbials apply to verbs or to whole sentences, and if you want to weight the meaning toward specific non-verb words in the sentence, you need very special context, and if you have that context, you don’t need to add weight to make the English translation mean something other than what the Klingon sentence actually means, which is either a verb or whole-sentence application of the adverbial. pItlh charghwI’ ‘utlh (ghaH, ghaH, -Daj)
On Aug 27, 2021, at 7:43 AM, mayqel qunen'oS <mihkoun@gmail.com> wrote:
SuStel:
That's why vabDot and tlhoS work similarly.
I think that adverbs having to do with the frequency of an action (i.e. pIj, pIjHa', roD, rut) work similarly:
pIj qama' DaqIp SoH you often *hit* prisoners often *you* hit prisoners you hit often *prisoners*
And perhaps other adverbs too can be understood multiple ways:
jaS be'vaD bIjatlh SoH you differently *speak* for women differently *you* speak for women you speak for *women* differently
~ D _______________________________________________ tlhIngan-Hol mailing list tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org