*ja'chuqghachraj vIlaDtaHvIS jIghel vIneHchoH je, 'ach pab bopmo' DIvI' Hol vIqaq. toH...* SuStel, you used *-qu'* on *jatlh* to express not intensity of the action or state the verb is describing (e.g. "speak a lot" or "speak loudly" or "speak really well" which would have been possible interpretations for me), but as an emphasis marker, like SPEAKING (as opposed to anything else), sort of like topicalizing a verb. Is there canonical evidence for this usage? I'm currently in Myanmar and didn't bring my TKD, so I can't check it easily now. But this usage strikes me as odd. Usually so-called "intensifiers" cannot do this in languages, but I don't know how Okrand described *-qu'* exactly. *mIyamavo' qavan*, - André P.S.: *Do'Ha' naQbe' Sindarin Hol Quenya Hol je. jIQochbe'. Esperanto Hol tlhIngan Hol je vIjatlhlaH. 'opleS latlh Hol 'oghlu'ta'bogh vIghojchugh, vaj Na'vi Hol vIwIv. muvuQqu' pabDaj! * On 31 Jul 2017 21:06, "SuStel" <sustel@trimboli.name> wrote:
On 7/31/2017 10:20 AM, mayqel qunenoS wrote:
SuStel:
jatlhqu'meH tlhIngan Hol naQ law' Quenya naQ puS
jIH:
Or is it rather "in order that he/they speaks/speak a lot, klingon is more complete than quenya" ?
SuStel
My intention was is the last one
Perhaps the reason of my confusion, becomes clearer now. If instead of {jatlhqu'meH tlhIngan Hol naQ law' Quenya naQ puS}, we had {jatlhqu'lu'meH tlhIngan Hol naQ law' Quenya naQ puS} meaning "in order for someone to speak..", then I could have understood the meaning better. Reading the {jatlhqu'meH tlhIngan Hol naQ law' Quenya naQ puS} and understanding "in order that he/they speaks/speak a lot, klingon is more complete than quenya", I begun to wonder who the "he/they" was/were. Let alone that I did the mistake of thinking that the {tlhIngan Hol} was part of the {meH}ed construction, as opposed to the law'/puS construction.
I'm not sure that would have helped. You weren't interpreting *tlhIngan Hol* as the subject of *jatlhqu'meH;* you were interpreting it as the head noun of *jatlhqu'meH.* Adding a *-lu'* wouldn't have changed anything.
Klingon purpose clauses are often used in a sort of infinite way. You don't say *ghojlu'meH taj;* you say *ghojmeH taj.* A subject is not always necessary or even implied. Sometimes it is speculated that you need a subject if the purpose clause attaches to a sentence instead of a noun, but we don't really know, and no survey of canon has been done recently on that.
-- SuStelhttp://trimboli.name
_______________________________________________ tlhIngan-Hol mailing list tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org