Sorry, I knew there was yet another one, but I couldn't remember it. Last question for now, I promise :-)
SaqSub’e’ muSHa’bogh
pawmeH leng qeylIS
HuDmey Sal ghIq ghIr
(paq'raD 7, 1-3)
Since there is only one noun in the relative clause, we don't need *-'e'* to know what's the object of *paw*. On the other side, *-'e'* is always optional in a relative clause. So, is it here just out of stylistic reasons, like the rhythm of the verse? (By
the way, what do we know about Klingon meter?).
Thank you!
_______________________________________________
tlhIngan-Hol mailing list
tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org
http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org