De'vID, be''etlh, and voragh thank you for replying. De'vID:

I can't recall any rule that says you can't have {'e'} as the object of a verb with {-bogh}, but it's ugly.

I agree. The original sentence {jeSlaH ghoj neHbogh nuvpu'} seemed weird to me too, with my original confusion being whether the {nuvpu'} could be the subject of the {jeSlaH}, since it was so far away from it. be''etlh:

bIghoj bIneHchugh, bIjeSlaH

Indeed, this is a much better way to convey the intended meaning. Thanks. voragh:

You’re both forgetting the rarely-used Type 2 suffix {-qang} “is willing to”

I forgot this too.. Strangely, there are some suffixes which I almost always forget, however as soon as someone reminds them to me, I realise how they could solve the problem. mayqel On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 5:36 PM, Steven Boozer <sboozer@uchicago.edu> wrote:

You’re both forgetting the rarely-used Type 2 suffix {-qang} “is willing to”. E.g.:

qaja'qang I am willing to tell you (TKD)

QaHqang He/she is willing to help. (KGT)

Heghqang he/she is willing to die (TKD)

HeghqangmoHlu'pu' It made him willing to die. (TKD)

vaSvamDaq tuq veng je quvvaD Heghqangbogh SuvwI’ tu’be’lu’’a’ Is there nobody in this hall prepared to die for the honor of your tribe and city? (PB)

So how about:

jeSlaH ghojqangbogh nuvpu'

those willing to learn can participate (“the people who are willing to learn are able to participate”)

--Voragh

From: Elizabeth Faber

I think you are trying to translate the English too directly. How about:

jeSlaH ghojwI'pu'

learners can participate

That's the cleanest translation I can come up with, and while its not exact it would serve most purposes. If you really want to make it conditional on volition, it would be at least somewhat less awkward with -chugh

ghoj neHchugh jeSlaH

If (he/one) wants to learn, (he/one) can participate

I like the phrasing better in second person

Daghoj bIneHchugh, bIjeSlaH

or

bIghoj bIneHchugh, bIjeSlaH

I think these last two convey your sentiment the most exactly without sounding terribly awkward in Klingon

-be''etlh

On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 11:54 AM, mayqel qunenoS <mihkoun@gmail.com> wrote:

Is the following sentence correct ?

{jeSlaH ghoj neHbogh nuvpu'}

the people who want to learn are able to participate

mayqel

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

On 9/26/2017 11:33 AM, nIqolay Q wrote:

On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 10:47 AM, mayqel qunenoS <mihkoun@gmail.com <mailto:mihkoun@gmail.com>> wrote:

I agree. The original sentence {jeSlaH ghoj neHbogh nuvpu'} seemed weird to me too, with my original confusion being whether the {nuvpu'} could be the subject of the {jeSlaH}, since it was so far away from it.

Why not? It wouldn't be any further away from the verb than it would be in a more usual relative clause that didn't have a sentence as object, like {jeSlaH yuch neHbogh nuvpu'} "The people who want chocolate can participate."

The sense of distance comes, not from the number of words, but from the fact that you've got a sentence-as-object inside a relative clause before  you ever get to the subject of the original verb. That's a lot of grammar to parse mentally before you find out what it is you're even talking about. -- SuStel http://trimboli.name

On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 12:09 PM, nIqolay Q <niqolay0@gmail.com> wrote:

That's a fair point. In this particular instance, I didn't think it was that confusing. The object sentence in the relative clause is only one word, {ghol}

<ghoj> 'oHba' mu' lugh'e'. HIvqa' ghol!