The so-called "Cat In The Hat" problem was first proposed by pabpo''a' quv Captain Krankor many years ago, and has been asked about many times since. In English, it's permissible to say the cat in the hat comes back, with the word in standing in for what one would assume to be a verb phrase. Captain Krankor wondered whether a construction like mIvDaq yIH the tribble in the helmet would be comprehensible, or even legal.

The solution to the problem:

• *mIvDaq yIH the tribble in the helmet is illegal in Klingon. According to TKD, the first noun of a noun-noun construction cannot take a Type 5 suffix.

• On the Bird of Prey poster, the phrase telDaq wovmoHwI'mey wing lights appears, an apparent violation of this rule. This could be simply a canon error: a normal noun-noun construction tel wovmoHwI'mey would have been sufficient in this case. The problem goes away if one interprets telDaq as a compound "wing-location" rather than a noun with the -Daq suffix. The English fails to match the Klingon perfectly in either case.

• The phrase ?ghe''orDaq luSpet a black hole in Gre'thor (PK) is also sometimes cited as a counterexample, but this is actually part of the sentence ghe''orDaq luSpet 'oH DaqlIj'e' your place is a black hole in Gre'thor, which is perfectly acceptable Klingon, although that's obscured by the translation. Here, ghe''orDaq is functioning as a normal header noun.

• Besides, in English the preposition in appears to be a substitute for a longer subordinate clause: really, what we are trying to say is the cat who is in the hat, or even the cat who wears the hat.

• So say the cat who wears the hat: mIv tuQbogh vIghro''e' the cat that wears a hat

This question and answer came from the KLI Wiki.