The {-'e'} suffix does not “emphasize” a noun. It marks it as the topic of a sentence, or draws focus to it. The kind of emphasis you are trying to express here is not done with syntax. It is done through vocal stress or text formatting, as in your first options.
To be fair, TKD does use the word emphasis regarding -'e', but it does so in its casual layman's way.
-'e' appears to have the following roles:
FOCUS
Okrand incorrectly calls this "topic" in section 3.3.5 of TKD. Focus means giving exclusivity to a noun: you're saying that the given noun, and not some other possible noun, is what you mean. In English we do this through vocal stress or certain grammatical constructions. I will give the TKD examples (correcting an error along the way):
jIlujpu' jIH'e' I, and only I, have failed. It is I who
has failed.
This is an example of using a couple of different grammatical
constructions to show the exclusivity of the subject. Of all
possible subjects who could have failed, I am expressing the idea
that only jIH failed.
Compare with jIlujpu' jIH I have failed. There is no exclusivity here. I'm not saying that out of all possible subjects who could have failed, only jIH has failed. I'm not saying anything about other possible subjects. Maybe they failed, maybe they didn't. I haven't said.
(Notice also that expressly stating the jIH in this sentence doesn't provide focus. The only kind of emphasis explicitly stating a pronoun provides is clarity: yep, you heard right, I said jIH.)
De''e' vItlhapnISpu' I needed to get the INFORMATION.
It was the information (and not something else) that I needed.
Here we have both English expressions: the first stresses the
focus noun vocally; the second expresses it with a grammatical
construction. Compare De' vItlhapnISpu' I needed to get
the information, which doesn't make information exclusive: I
might have needed to get something else too, or maybe not, but
this sentence doesn't concern itself with that.
In all canon, I believe we've only ever seen a focus -'e' on the object or subject of a verb.
Note that it is essentially wrong to translate a focus -'e'
with as for. jIlujpu' jIH'e' does not mean As
for me, I failed, and De''e' vItlhapnISpu'
does not mean As for the information, I needed it.
TOPIC
Topic means identifying what the sentence is all about. We see topic in pronoun-as-to-be sentences. TKD's examples:
puqpu' chaH qama'pu''e' The prisoners are children.
pa'DajDaq ghaHtaH la''e' The commander is in his
quarters.
These, we are told, can also be translated As for the prisoners, they are children; As for the commander, his is in his quarters. The sentences are all about the final word marked with -'e'.
It would be incorrect to translate these as The prisoners, and only the prisoners, are children and The commander, and only the commander, is in his quarters.
We have also seen what is very likely a topic noun in qIbDaq SuvwI''e' SoH Dun law' Hoch Dun puS. Clearly, the SuvwI'pu''e' doesn't mean warriors and only warriors, but it makes better sense as As for a warrior, in the galaxy you are the greatest. It's possible that -'e' might be playing a special role of "topic of a comparative/superlative" for which we have not been given a rule.
Okrand has said that "fronting" nouns is marked in Klingon, used for extra emphasis, and I believe that includes putting -'e' nouns at the front with no other indication of their grammatical purpose. He says doing that all the time would be like speaking in Shakespearean English all the time. I liken it to speaking to a child in your exasperated parent voice all the time. "I said get in the bathroom and brush your teeth. NOW. GO NOW. BRUSH! TEETH! NOW!"
It's unclear to me whether HaqwI''e' DaH yISam Find
the SURGEON now! really refers to topic or focus. It would
make sense as either. Topic: I need the surgeon! Get him! Find the
surgeon now! Focus: I need the surgeon, not some other officer,
now. Given that it's on an object, and given the translation
showing vocal stress, if I had to guess, I'd guess focus.
RELATIVE CLAUSE HEAD NOUN
We know that -'e' can mark the head noun of a relative clause. In this role, it doesn't seem to mean either topic or focus. You might consider that the "topic of the relative clause," but rather than confusing the issue, just say it marks the head noun of the relative clause. We know that the head noun of a relative clause MUST be the object or subject of the relative clause's verb.
SO...
Where does that leave the idea of using -'e' to mark time expressions and locative nouns? It leaves us in the usual place of "There's no rule against it but no supporting evidence either." It's not completely unreasonable to suppose that DaSjaj'e' jIvumchoH means I begin work on Monday and only on Monday (focus), and it's not completely unreasonable to suppose that it means As for Monday, that's the day I begin work (topic). It's not completely unreasonable to suppose that naDev'e' ghoqwI' tu'lu' means There's a spy here and only here (focus), and it's not completely unreasonable to suppose that it means As for here, there's a spy here. It's also not unreasonable to wonder whether these things are allowed at all, since we've never once seen either of them.
And there you have it. Lots of information, no answers. De''e'
DatlhapnISbe'pu' 'e' vItul.
-- SuStel http://trimboli.name