Re: help with "Floreat Majestas"

[Alan Anderson <aranders@netusa1.net>]

ja' willm@cstone.net:
>...Maybe this business of having direct
>objects preceed the verb has more significance than we've been giving it.
>Perhaps the association between the direct object and the verb is more
>important in Klingon than that between the subject and the verb.

Perhaps you're overthinking it. :-)  Or perhaps you're not thinking it
through far enough, and it's not just objects which have a tight connection
to the verb.  Consider the holiday proverb from PK {Hoch DaSopbe'chugh
batlh bIHeghbe'} and notice that {batlh Hegh} seems to be a closely
associated pair of words.  Maybe {wa'leS qaghomQo'} is more like "I refuse
to (meet you tomorrow)" than like "Tomorrow, I will refuse to meet you."

Or maybe there's no real overriding connection, and things are actually a
lot less rigorous than you might want them to be.

>So, what's your verdict? Does this idea fly or flounder?

I think it's an insightful observation, and it will likely be a worthwhile
addition to your personal model of how Klingon works.  However, I don't
think it's a particularly useful idea to include in a set of Klingon "rules
of grammar".  I see it as a descriptive concept, not a prescriptive one.

-- ghunchu'wI'