RE: KLBC: Clause ordering...is this right?

["Andeen, Eric" <Eric.Andeen@Sequencia.com>]

jatlh juDmoS:
> Hung tlhab ghap luqotlhtaHHa' Hung luSuqmeH tlhabchaj lujeghqangbogh.

ja' juDmoS je: 
> The purpose clause ' Hung luSuqmeH ' (in order to obtain security) 
> precedes the relative clause ' tlhabchaj lujeghqangbogh ' ( they 
> which are willing to surrender their freedom). This entire 
> construction follows the head noun ' luqotlhtaHHa' ' (they are 
> undeserving of it) because it is the subject of the sentence. The 
> object of the sentence is the phrase       ' Hung tlhab ghap ' 
> ( either security or freedom).

jIjatlh:
> I don't think <Hung tlhab ghap> works. This says that they mis-deserve
> (makes perfect sense in Klingon; not so much in English) either security
or
> freedom, but not both. I think what you mean is that they mis-deserve both
> security *and* freedom.

jatlh quljIb:
> {Hung tlhab joq qotlhHa'taH} is the wanted phrase. "Freedon and/or
> security they continuously mis-deserve."

Actually, I don't think it is. <Hung tlhab joq qotlhHa'taH> means that they
misdeserve *at least one of* "freedom" and/or "security". The point of the
original quote is that they deserve neither, so they must misdeserve *both*.


pagh
Beginners' Grammarian

tlhIngan Hol Mailing List FAQ
http://www.bigfoot.com/~dspeers/klingon/faq.htm