So, the thing I understand from this thread is that in a string of {-bogh}s, the noun should be added after the first {-bogh}.

The thing you should understand from this thread is that in a series of verbs with a common object or subject, if the object or subject is repeated it's usually the second and later ones that are dropped, not the first one.

It doesn't matter whether the verbs have -bogh or -chugh or -DI' or nothing at all (independent clauses). They're all treated the same.

This is almost universally true. Verbs with subordinate clause markers on them are just like verbs without subordinate clause markers, except their role is subordinated to another verb.

I'll regard the {romuluSngan Sambogh and HoHbogh nejwI'} a special-because-matlh-said-so case.

You should regard it as an illustration that this isn't an exact formula to follow strictly, that there are times when it makes sense to deviate from the norm. In this case, the deviation probably occurs because the author is trying to make finding and killing closely tied together. It's not that the probe happens to find and happens to kill and does these things separately. Its function is finding-and-killing all in one.

You wouldn't say Sambogh 'ej romuluSngan HoHbogh nejwI', would you? Of course not. Ask yourself why not.

-- 
SuStel
http://trimboli.name