[Tlhingan-hol] Klingon Word of the Day: meq

[lojmIt tI'wI' nuv]

Your comparative sentence is good, but you end it with a comma and then treat it as the object of {moj}, forgetting to use {'e'} for SAO. 

As for {meq} with SAO, it's less Earth shattering than you suggest. It's very similar to {Qub} in meaning. Reasoning doesn't imply speaking out loud. 

A quotation is not a direct object of a verb of speech. It's not merely SAO without {'e'} like {neH}. It's a wholly unrelated grammatical construction. 

Sent from my iPod

> On Feb 20, 2016, at 6:16 AM, mayql qunenoS <mihkoun at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> jIH :
>> ghaH QaQ law' chaH QaQ law', mojlaHbe' luQaHbe'chugh 'e' meq ghaH.
>> he reasoned that if they didn't help him he wouldn't be able to become
>> as good as them.
> 'arHa' :
>> (I imagine that using law' twice was just a mistake.
>> If that was intentional, then I *really* don't understand.)
> 
> Yes, it was intentional.. Do you have boQwI' ? If yes, then type at
> the search bar <... X law' ... X puS>, and then scroll down and read
> the comments. In case you don't have boQwI', here is what it says on
> the relevant grammar which I used in my sentence :
> 
> <...to say that something is as X as something else, law' is used with
> law' (if the quality or its possession is considered positive)...>
> 
> And then it continues saying a lot of beautiful stuff on the grammar
> of <... X law' ... X puS>, which as soon as I read it, myself screamed
> to me and said : <HOW THE F*** WAS I SUPPOSED TO KNOW ALL THIS ?!?!>,
> along with a bunch of greek other curses which I cannot translate in
> english..
> 
> Anyway, I don't know if the sentence that I wrote {ghaH QaQ law' chaH
> QaQ law', mojlaHbe' luQaHbe'chugh 'e' meq ghaH} is correct or not.
> Although If it is, I will temporarily promote myself to the rank of
> {'ech}, because when I got the idea of writing it, I thought that it
> would be impossible to actually pull this off.
> 
> Anyway.. HERE IS THE MOST IMPORTANT POINT !!!!!!!
> 
> I noticed that noone wrote that my examples where the {meq} (v) was
> written in a SAO construction was wrong. So I gather that one can use
> the {meq} (v) in a SAO. right ?
> 
> If the answer is indeed <yes>, then I believe that we just found the
> <money laundring> equivalent for quotations in Klingon ! In fact we
> could turn this to a commercial being played at KLI..
> 
> (music..) and then the voice will say : do you want to quote by the
> use of a SAO ? I'm sure you do.. but it is wrong ! So what do you do ?
> instead of {... 'e' jatlh ghaH} just use {... 'e' meq ghaH} and
> problem solved ! (..end of music).
> 
> If {meq} can take an object and be used in SAO, I'm telling you all, I
> will definitely meq the hell out of every quotation I could possibly
> think of.
> 
> ..so altering slightly 'arHa's words on {ghach}, I will say, let the
> {meq}ing begin you cannot stop me !
> 
> qunnoq 'ech
> lurSa' be'etor je, Sutujqu'bej 'ej SaneH !
> 
>> On Sat, Feb 20, 2016 at 4:52 AM, SuStel <sustel at trimboli.name> wrote:
>>> On 2/19/2016 8:53 PM, John R. Harness wrote:
>>> 
>>> Q for everyone: Can you put -mo' in the midst of the law' / puS
>>> construction?
>> 
>> 
>> I don't see how. In what role? Noun or verb suffix?
>> 
>> --
>> SuStel
>> http://trimboli.name
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Tlhingan-hol mailing list
>> Tlhingan-hol at kli.org
>> http://mail.kli.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Tlhingan-hol mailing list
> Tlhingan-hol at kli.org
> http://mail.kli.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol