SuStel:
ngavyaw’ ghu = canine’s baby or baby of the canine = puppy ghu ngavyaw’ = baby’s canine or canine of the baby = baby’s pet You forget the more general genitive interpretation of the noun-noun construction. I'm not going to address this question directly, because baby and canine are both nouns and adjectives, and this confuses the translations. Instead, I'm going to translate an idea that deals strictly in nouns. How about a student who is a child? ghojwI' puq student child puq ghojwI' child student Which is it? Is it a child (head noun) of the type student (modifying noun)? Or is it a student (head noun) of the type child (modifying noun)? It's both. Either is correct. It's a child who is a student and a student who is a child. So, completely ignoring semantics, is it ngavyaw' ghu canine baby or ghu ngavyaw' baby canine ? It's both. Either is correct. It's a baby that is a canine, and it's a canine that is a baby.
maj. De'vam vIyaj. 'a latlh vay''e' qaghel vIneH. "empress" jImugh vIneH. cha' DuH tu'lu': {be' voDleH} {voDleH be'} je, 'ej lughlaw' Hoch. 'a "empress" DamughnIS net jalchugh, nuq 'oH DuH'e' DamaSbogh ? chay' bIwuq ? vuDlIj vISov vIneH. ~ Qa'yIn