RE: EK: ghomqa'ghach

["Agnieszka Solska" <agnpau1@hotmail.com>]

jIja':
>As Andrew Strader once pointed out, we don't know if a possessive suffix, > 
>such as {-chaj} can precede the noun it refers to, i.e. {pab po'wI'pu').

SIv DloraH:
>Huh?

SIv je Quvar:
>{pongDaj Sovbe' loD.} That's not wrong, is it?


jIQIjchu'be' 'e' vItu'ba'.

Well, The English version of the example I was not happy about would be:

.....In order to cause *the grammarians* to be
     willing to present *their* opinions

What comes first? *the grammarians*.
What comes further in the sentence? *their* opinions.
Whose opinions ? Well, the grammarians' opinions.
(Though theoretically it could also be somebody else's.)

And the Klingon original is:

    vuDmey*chaj* muchqangchoHmeH *pab po'wI'pu'*.

What comes first? *vuDmey*chaj*.
What comes further in the sentence? *pab po'wI'pu'*

My problem is that I am not sure if *vuDmey*chaj* (their opinions, meaning 
the grammarians' opinions, not somebody else's) can really be used refer to 
something (i.e. *pab po'wI'pu'*) that will only appear further in the 
sentence.

What makes me suspicious is the proverb which is glossed as:

"Klingons kill for their own purposes"

Yet the tlhIngan Hol version is not

{ngoQmey*chaj* chavmeH HoH tlhInganpu'}

but it is phrased quite differently, namely:

{tlhIngan ngoQmey chavmeH HoH tlhInganpu'}


chaq tlhoy jIQub.

'ISqu'


_________________________________________________________________
Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com