Translation:Can we go to the Great Hall from here?
I thought that jaH was one of those verbs of motion that was supposed to take its destination as a direct object, and thus, there should be no Daq suffix on vas'a. Is this that sentence that's supposed to famously contain a controversial canonical error?
(I remember discussion of such a sentence not too long ago, but it felt beyond my capabilities to parse at the time, so I didn't pay it all that much attention.)
This sentence comes from Power Klingon, which was released prior to the revelation of verbs that can take locatives as their objects. Obviously, Okrand created the new rule after coming up with this sentence. It is not a good choice to use in the Duolingo course because of this.
For me, the problem with this sentence is not so much the -Daq as the ma- in majaHlaH'a'. I read the interview with Marc Okrand on how to use verbs of motion. I thought (!) I had understood that if the "going" is taking place IN the object (with -Daq), then you would use ma-. If we are going TO the object, then we would use wI- (with or without -Daq). So, why do we have a ma- here instead of a wI-? tuQaH 'e' vIqoy'
See my reply to TARDISToni. Basically, this sentence came out before the new rule about objects with -Daq. in Power Klingon. It does not follow the later rule.
So, if we are translating this sentence from English to Klingon according to this "new" Power Klingon rule (which is apparently now canon because the Great Creator has commanded it be so), it should read naDevvo' vaS'a' wIjaHlaH'a', correct?
Using the wI- prefix here may make sense from the standpoint of the grammatical rules, but it still feels just a bit odd.