"The children pretended to be warriors."
Translation:SuvwI'pu' chaH 'e' lughet puqpu'.
Is my sentence not correct?
The English sentence is 'The children pretended to be warriors".
The correct Klingon sentence is given as SuvwI'pu' chaH 'e' lughet puqpu'.
My sentence which was rejected was suvwi'pu' chaH puqpu''e' 'e' lughet.
Except for the capital S.
My first inclination with your sentence was to assume that someone else was pretending that the children were warriors. But it could mean either and it's no more likely than the original version meaning, the children pretend that (some other) "they" are warriors.
I missed an i as well.
That is interesting. I thought that there was a preference in Klingon for the noun to be mentioned in the first sentence or phrase and then the pronouns relating back to it to come later. Is that not so? So I always try to write my sentences that way. Do I not need to do that? Or is it situational? In that case, I don't know which situations to do that and which not.
The Klingon Dictionary describes pronouns with antecedents, not postcedents, and that's generally what I recommend you do. But I'm not sure it's an inviolable rule. I can't think of any pronouns with postcedents in the canon, but I can't say for sure they aren't there without doing fine research, which I'm not prepared to do right now. There probably ARE examples of possessive suffixes being used before the possessor is mentioned.
It is the case sometimes that when the independent parts of a phrase are closely related, they can act like a unit, provided they don't otherwise break the rules. It would not, for instance, be beyond the pale to say something like Soj vut 'ej Sop loD The man cooks and eats the food. But you're still better off doing this the normal way: Soj vut loD 'ej Sop.