tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Oct 16 22:33:53 1995
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: HolQeD 4:3 p4 S7
On Mon, 16 Oct 1995, Anthony Curran wrote:
> I was just attempting to parse the entry for card S7 in the latest issue of
> HolQeD, and I came across something that I'm not sure I understand. In the
> first part of the third sentence:
>
> DujvamDaq tlhingan nuH tu'lu'bogh pov law' Hoch pov puS...
>
> the excellence of the Klingon weapons which one finds on this vessel is
> greater than the excellence of all others.
When the second half of a law'/puS construction contains {Hoch}, it changes
the sentence from a comparative (-er, more excellent, better) to a
superlative (-est, most excellent, best).
A more straightforward translation would be "The Klingon weapons found on
this ship are the best."
> The question is this. Am I correctly interpreting the placement of the
> word <tlhingan> in this sentence? Somehow pointing out that they are
> Klingon weapons seems odd, almost extraneous. At first I thought that
> <tlhingan> was describing the ship, but in that case, it should be placed
> before <DujvamDaq>. Am I picking a nit, or is it possible there is
> something new here?
{tlhIngan nuH} is a noun-noun construction meaning "Klingon weapon".
You are correct in that "on this Klingon vessel" would be {tlhIngan
DujvamDaq}. My guess as to why the sentence is worded this way is that,
since law'/puS constructions are complete sentences unto themselves, they
can't be used as the subject of another sentence, so I suppose this is
the closest way you could say, "The best Klingon weapons are found on
this ship."
> Also, is there prior canon evidence that the -bogh contruction in a
> law'/puS comparison is valid, or is this the first confirmation that this
> is allowed?
This is the first time we have seen this particular type of construction.
But {-bogh} constructions, as a unit, essentially function as nouns so
there is really no problem with using a {-bogh} construction in a
law'/puS comparison.
> qo'ran
yoDtargh