[Tlhingan-hol] KLBC: {-'e'} and {-bogh}

[qov at kli.org]

I think you've got it.  I believe you may have overcomplicated things for
yourself in the beginning.

> Qov : > chalDaq Qob nIn Hutlhbogh muD Duj.
> jIH : > I would translate this as <an airplane which lacks fuel is
dangerous at
> the
>        > sky or maybe <the sky (where there is) an airplane without fuel
is
>        > dangerous.
> De'vID : > {chalDaq Qob nIn'e' Hutlhbogh muD Duj} yIqel.
> 
> I don't understand this. how does the placement of {-'e'} on {nIn} alter
the
> translations I wrote ?
> 
> jIH : > the sky (where there is) an airplane without fuel
>       > is dangerous chalDaq'e' Qob nIn Hutlhbogh muD Duj.
> De'vID : > DuHbe' mu'tlheghvam. mojaq Segh vagh bIH {-Daq}'e' {-'e'}'e'
je.
> 
> ok, this I understand. I can't have two type 5 noun suffixes on the same
> word.
> 
> moving on..
> 
> lojmIt tI'wI' nuv : > Beyond the problem of two Type 5 suffixes on {chal},
>                     > the root issue is that it is problematic to use a
locative
>                     > as a subject of a verb. It suggests that the
location of a thing
>                     > is doing the action of the verb rather than the
thing itself.
>                     > The circumstances would have to be exceptional, if
it is possible
>                     > at all. My imagination fails to invent a good case.
> 
> ok, I understand this, thanks.
> 
> jIH : > the sky (where there is) an airplane without fuel is dangerous
> chalDaq'e' Qob nIn
>       > Hutlhbogh muD Duj
> Qov : > Read the comments others have written in response to this.
> They cover the type-5
>       > problem and the second meaning which you missed.
> 
> I read the other comments, but I still can't figure out the correct
translation.
> 
> Qov : > nIn Hutlhbogh muD Duj. Which is dangerous, the fuel
>       > that the  aircraft lacks, or the aircraft that
>       > lacks fuel?
> 
> the aircraft that lacks the fuel.

I wish I could figure out which bit of this sentence threw you, because it's
not a lot different from the others.

chalDaq Qob nIn Hutlhbogh muD Duj.

The setting is chalDaq.
There is no object.
The verb is Qob.
The subject is nIn Hutlhbogh muD Duj.

With no topic marker to specify which of the nous is the head of the
relative clause, we consider whether that makes the most sense to be nIn or
muD Duj.

If it's nIn, then the sentence is "In the sky, the fuel that a ship lacks is
dangerous."
If it's muD Duj then the sentence is "In the sky, the ship that lacks fuel
is dangerous."

An English-language pilot saying  includes the line "fuel you didn't take"
in a list of the most dangerous things in aviation.  Because the danger is
really the whole thing, the ship that lacks fuel and the fuel it lacks, I
marked neither noun.

I see that others have explained this too, so you will have no shortage of
explanations. 

> Qov : > Still, no.   That -bogh clause sits in the subject position of
> the sentence.
>       > The marker -'e' cannot alter the OVS structure of the sentence nor
of
> the -bogh clause.
>       > All -'e' does is specify which of the nouns in the -bogh clause
does the
> job of sentence subject.
>       > The subject of the -bogh clause is wa'maH wa' rewbe'. You cannot
> change that without altering
>       > the order of the words. Write now properly in Klingon how you
would
> translate <the exceptional
>       > robot which created the eleven citizens, searches for the ship>.
> 
> now, this is beautiful ! I believe here lies the root of the problem (my
> problem). if I manage to really understand these comments you wrote, I
> believe that my problem with {-'e'} will be resolved. So, how would I say
<the
> exceptional robot which created the eleven citizens, searches for the
ship>.
> 
> I will not look at the previous sentences before attempting to translate
this,
> so as not to influence my mind, or even worst cheat.. So, lets assume this
is
> the first time I saw this english sentence and tried to translate it in
klingon.
> maybe I would say :
> 
> Duj nej wa'maH wa' rewbe' chenmoHpu'bogh qoq le''e'.
> 
> maybe now, I'm beginning to understand. the <the exceptional robot which
> created the eleven citizens> is the subject (S). the (V) is the <searches
for>
> and the (O) is <the ship>.

maj. And in the -bogh clause itself, {qoq le'} is the subject and {wa'maH
wa' rewbe'} is the object.

> But if I now dare to venture deeper in the rabbit hole of {-'e'}, in this
> example, why do I need the {-'e'} ?
> This is *the* question. If I now take into account, that the {-'e'}
specifies
> which of the nouns in the -bogh clause does the job of sentence subject,
> then maybe if I wrote :
> 
> Duj nej wa'maH wa' rewbe''e' chenmoHpu'bogh qoq le'.
> 
> the translation would be :
> 
> <the eleven citizens who were created by the robot are searching for the
> ship>.
> is this correct ?

Almost. As {wa'maH wa' rewbe'} is a plural subject, and {nej} has the zero
prefix, then we know that Duj must be plural.

> "The eleven citizens who were created by the robot search for the ships."

> Something tells me that it isn't.. Because if it is, this means
> what ? That I can take a sentence, throw it in the cooking cauldron along
with
> the desired use of {-'e'}, stir the two together and voila !
> produce passive voice..

You have no more created passive voice in Klingon than you have created
type-5 suffixes in English. When you translate, you use the tools the
language has. If I can use a ladder to get things off high shelves in my
house and you stand on a dog in your house, the fact that I could reach the
marmalade  for breakfast this morning does not imply the spontaneous
appearance of a dog in my kitchen. Different tools, same job, even if I
sometimes refer to your dog as a ladder, and you sometimes refer to my
ladder as a dog. (Also some people will complain that it's stupid that you
stand on a dog, and your house can't be taken seriously as a real house
until whoever built it gets you a ladder).

> tell me your comments, and then I will move on to the rest of the
sentences in your original message.
> I believe it is better to proceed slowly, solving the mystery of {-'e'}
small
> steps at a time..

I'm almost certain that you have this and are reading more into it than
necessary, but for your fun and satisfaction, and that of other beginners
who are undoubtedly watching this and considering you brave to step up and
reveal your confusion, I will give you some more to try. Use -'e' for each
or explain why it's not needed. I'm using some newer vocabulary because
since you have to look it all up anyway, I might as well exercise the minds
of the people who know all the old vocab by heart.

HejwI' vem'e' tu'bogh Hoqra' qon yaS.
'IH Hoqra' 'uchbogh yaS'e'.
QI' yaS ghaH yaS'e' Ho'bogh loDnI'lI'.
QI yaS ghaH'a' QI 'avbogh nuv'e'?
Doq meyrI''e' yughbogh loS reD 'Impey pIrmuS 'a SuD ra'Duchmey Dabogh
Dopmey.
moH yang ghIHmo' toqwIn'e' laSta'bogh 'aj.
pIm 'uSqan'e' lo'bogh no'ma'.

The girl who likes copper fell from the jungle gym.
I drop the unprocessed silver that the miner found.
The man who owns the mine pays the miner who brings the gold.
The brave captain uses robot-destroying logic.  [Hint: "logic which can
destroy a robot"]
Ammunition that pierces an exterior wall may kill an innocent neighbour.
The manager who put in the staple that made me bleed is sorry.
On Tuesday I will present the spreadsheet which consists of columns.
On Wednesday the rows of the spreadsheet which annoy my father will be
deleted. [change to "I will delete" if you don't know the -lu' suffix yet].
Before the festival you and your sister feed the animals that will be killed
by the crowd.
The artery cut by the ceremonial knife sprays blood on the street.
A group of sentences Qov writes quickly becomes violent.
Never annoy the full moon.

Also, for the beginner spectators, one source of confusion around -'e' is
that it is completely unrelated to the similarly spelled and also confusing
word 'e'. Know that these are two different things and life will be grand.