[Tlhingan-hol] chIjwI' tIQ bom: 'ay' vagh

[ghunchu'wI' 'utlh]

On Sun, Sep 18, 2011 at 6:55 AM, Rohan Fenwick - QeS 'utlh
<qeslagh at hotmail.com> wrote:
> jIH:
>> ngIq tlhegh wIluH, porghvetlh jIH je,
>
> Qov:
>> That body and I hauled on each individual line.
>> {Uhh, why not wa' tlhegh? Are you getting carried away with ngIq?}
>
> Possibly. I thought ghunchu'wI' had given an example from the part of
> 'u' that he, 'ISqu' and Qanqor were reading in which {ngIq tonSaw'}
> had been used for "one single manoeuvre", but I can't find the email
> now and wa' tlhegh works just fine.

The meaning of the {'u'} usage of {ngIq} in this sort of context is
perhaps a bit cryptic. The accompanying English said something like
"With one single move, he caused this; with one single move, he caused
that; with one single move he caused the other." The three mentions
are obviously all refering to the same single move. The Klingon
repeats the phrase {ngIq tonSaw' lo'} for the same effect. If it
hadn't been for the multiple references, {ngIq} would have been
unnecessary, and {wa'} would have been perfectly appropriate. I would
interpret a single {ngIq} before a single thing as singling out that
thing as unique among potentially similar things, but having never
seen it used that way I don't know whether that is a correct
interpretation.

-- ghunchu'wI'