(This concerns a discussion having taken place in Discord some days ago. I'm posting this here, since one can't easily follow a discussion being interrupted by a continuous feed). In Duolingo there's the sentence: {cha' loDnI'pu' ghaj vavwI' loDnal, vaj cha' tennuS vIghaj} Someone translated this as "My father's husband has two brothers, thus I have two uncles", and Duolingo replied "Incorrect. Answer: My father's husband has two brothers, so I have two uncles". Then SuStel commented: *****quote starts***** I doubt it's an allowed option, but It would need to be and thus. So is a conjunction when used this way; thus is not. Either that, or you'd need a semi-colon before the thus, but the course generally doesn't push two independent clauses together without being in a sentence-as-object construction or conjoined. Hm. I wonder if it's even formally correct to use so as a conjunction like this. And since the Klingon doesn't have a conjunction either, it's probably just a bad example all around. *****quote ends*** I'm not concerned with Duolingo, so I'm not asking regarding which sentence it should accept as the correct one. But what I don't understand is the following. I was under the impression that the adverb {vaj} was more or less a way to express things like "because something happens, happens something else"; and if I remember correctly the {vaj} was all we had before the {-mo'}. The way I understand {vaj}, it is used to lead to a logical conclusion as a result of something which was already stated. I can't understand the comment about it being a conjunction, when used in the way of the Duolingo sentence. It seems perfectly normal to say: "my father's wife has two brothers, so I have two uncles", which would be the equivalent of "because my father's wife has two brothers, I have two uncles". Or alternatively "my fathers wife has two brothers, so (and the logical conclusion follows) I have two uncles". -- Dana'an https://sacredtextsinklingon.wordpress.com/ Ζεὺς ἦν, Ζεὺς ἐστίν, Ζεὺς ἔσσεται· ὦ μεγάλε Ζεῦ