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.

-- 
SuStel
http://trimboli.name

_______________________________________________
tlhIngan-Hol mailing list
tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org
http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org