charghwI':
 

As a stylistic thing, I’d probably choose {X tu’lu’be’} to mean that there are no Xs, since {tu’lu’} is pretty much fossilized as “There is an X or there are Xs”, while {tu’be’lu’} breaks the fossilized form, suggesting the more literal translation that one doesn’t observe or discover it, so I’d translate “The Undiscovered Country” as  {Sep tu’be’lu’bogh}. There is a country, so {Sep tu’lu’be’bogh} kinda suggests that there isn’t a country, so it doesn’t work as well for a translation, In My Humble Opinion.

Thank you for your interesting contributions. That's a very good question. But then, do you think the combination I used in my text (*tu'choHlu'pu'*), since it *breaks* the *tu'lu'*, would be rather understood with the more literal meaning of *observe, find, discover*? I was trying to render the idea of *there have begun to be* (*they have come into existence*).

I don't think tu'lu' should be thought of as an indivisible particle. The tu' and the -lu' put together tend to have a fixed meaning, but that doesn't mean the combination has been turned into its own unaffixed word. If you want tu'choHlu'pu' to mean there had begun to be, that should be fine.

-- 
SuStel
http://trimboli.name