[Tlhingan-hol] Type 5 on first noun

[De'vID]

lojmIt tI'wI' nuv:
>> It’s already been pointed out that this is not a complete sentence, and
>> so likely not a noun-noun construction.

I'll add my voice to the chorus that has made the observation that the
only instances are not complete sentences.

When Klingon is transcribed, there is minimal punctuation. I interpret
the examples as something like {telDaq: wovmoHwI'mey} and {QamchIyDaq:
'uQ'a'}. They're abbreviations for sentences where the verb (e.g.,
{qaS}, {[lu]tu'lu'}) has been dropped.

lojmIt tI'wI' nuv:
>> Likely, he wanted to be able to
>> express the difference between “The feast at Qam-Chee” and “At the feast
>> of Qam-Chee”.

SuStel:
> He could have said simply, {QamchIy 'uQ'a'} "the feast of Qam-Chee."
>
> Later on he uses a title {SIqral bIQtIq ghom} "Assembly at the River Skral."
> Why didn't he say {SIqral bIQtIqDaq ghom}? That even works with {ghom} as a
> verb.
>
> And then later is {SIqral bIQtIq may'} "The Battle at the River Skral," and
> not *{SIqral bIQtIqDaq may'}.

This is purely speculation, but perhaps it's the difference between a
generic description vs. a named event?

{QamchIyDaq: 'uQ'a'} "the feast at Qam-Chee", a feast that occurs at
Qam-Chee; vs.
{QamchIy 'uQ'a'} "*the* feast of Qam-Chee", a special feast
specifically associated with Qam-Chee

{SIqral bIQtIqDaq: may'} "at the River Skral: a battle" (any battle
that takes place there); vs.
{SIqral bIQtIq may'} "*the* Battle at the Rival Skral" (the one you
read about in the history books)

Do {SIqral bIQtIq ghom} and {SIqral bIQtIq may'} appear as chapter
titles, phrases in the text, or both?

SuStel:
> What do noun-noun constructions have to do with whether these are complete
> sentences? {nuH pegh} means "secret of the weapon" whether it's in a
> complete sentence or not.

If I saw {nuHDaq[:] pegh} "the secret in the weapon" as a chapter
title in a book, I'd assume that the chapter was about {nuHDaq pegh
tu'lu'bogh}. (Perhaps {pegh} is not the best example, since it's both
a noun and a verb, but let's assume I know it's a noun here.) But if
in the chapter I read {nuHDaq pegh ja' ghoqwI'}, I'd assume the spy is
on/at/in the weapon while telling the secret.

SuStel:
> *{qamchIyDaq 'uQ'a'} is wrong, according to TKD,
> whether it's in a complete sentence or not.

This is what TKD says:
<When the noun-noun construction is used, only the second noun can
take syntactic suffixes (Type 5). Both nouns, however, may take
suffixes of the other four types.>

Since {-Daq} is on the first noun in these pairs, if we go by the
definition in TKD, they are not noun-noun constructions (in the sense
defined in TKD 3.4).

-- 
De'vID