[110649] in tlhIngan-Hol
Re: [tlhIngan Hol] Pluralizing inherently plural nouns
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (SuStel)
Wed Aug 16 11:26:33 2017
X-Original-To: tlhingan-hol@lists.kli.org
To: tlhingan-hol@lists.kli.org
From: SuStel <sustel@trimboli.name>
Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2017 11:25:59 -0400
In-Reply-To: <CAP7F2cLLZ9WLnP48+ew3xJpup650vW=ZrRLGKrHZ0ntvtvBoxQ@mail.gmail.com>
Reply-To: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
Errors-To: tlhingan-hol-bounces@lists.kli.org
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--===============4228837988860450930==
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="------------26718CC6EEB99EB78E586DD2"
Content-Language: en-US
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------26718CC6EEB99EB78E586DD2
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
On 8/16/2017 11:23 AM, mayqel qunenoS wrote:
> (KGT 33-34):
>> Children seem to be aware of the existence of the inherently plural forms, however, for they
>> use them as well, though usually with the suffix {-mey} superfluously appended: {chamey} (torpedoeses),
>> {ngopmey} (plateses).
> So, as I understand this - and someone correct me if I'm wrong - it
> isn't grammatically wrong to add a plural suffix, to an inherently
> plural noun; it is just that the resulting word/meaning is
> strange/awkward.
It is grammatically wrong. /Plateses/ and /torpedoeses/ are
grammatically wrong. They're awkward because it's grammatically wrong.
--
SuStel
http://trimboli.name
--------------26718CC6EEB99EB78E586DD2
Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 8/16/2017 11:23 AM, mayqel qunenoS
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAP7F2cLLZ9WLnP48+ew3xJpup650vW=ZrRLGKrHZ0ntvtvBoxQ@mail.gmail.com">
<pre wrap="">(KGT 33-34):
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite" style="color: #000000;">
<pre wrap="">Children seem to be aware of the existence of the inherently plural forms, however, for they
use them as well, though usually with the suffix {-mey} superfluously appended: {chamey} (torpedoeses),
{ngopmey} (plateses).
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">So, as I understand this - and someone correct me if I'm wrong - it
isn't grammatically wrong to add a plural suffix, to an inherently
plural noun; it is just that the resulting word/meaning is
strange/awkward.</pre>
</blockquote>
<p>It is grammatically wrong. <i>Plateses</i> and <i>torpedoeses</i>
are grammatically wrong. They're awkward because it's
grammatically wrong.<br>
</p>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
SuStel
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://trimboli.name">http://trimboli.name</a></pre>
</body>
</html>
--------------26718CC6EEB99EB78E586DD2--
--===============4228837988860450930==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
_______________________________________________
tlhIngan-Hol mailing list
tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org
http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org
--===============4228837988860450930==--
