[89152] in tlhIngan-Hol

home help back first fref pref prev next nref lref last post

RE: mu'mey chu': ngIq

daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (David Trimboli)
Mon Aug 22 15:40:49 2011

From: "David Trimboli" <david@trimboli.name>
To: <tlhingan-hol@kli.org>
In-Reply-To: <C305E6BD33E2654DAE1F8F403247B6A602D46C0BDFEB@EVS02.ad.uchicago.edu>
Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2011 15:33:41 -0400
Errors-to: tlhingan-hol-bounce@kli.org
Reply-to: tlhingan-hol@kli.org

jatlh voragh:

> I found this example of "one by one" in my notes: "I shall torture you
> to death, one by one."  (Kang, TOS "Day of the Dove")
> 
> So experimenting with {ngIq}, this would be: nqIq Sajoy'DI' SuHoH

Only if you accept the notion that the prefix does not need to agree with
the object if you want the force the object into apposition with the
first or second person. I, for one, do not support this notion.

> or, like all of ghunchu'wI's sample sentence, do I need the pronoun in
> apposition to {ngIq}?
> 
> nqIq tlhIH Sajoy'DI' SuHoH

Maybe. Do we have any evidence that any of the other "quantity nouns,"
{Hoch}, {HochHom}, and {'op}, can work on pronouns? Does the "explicit
plural" rule apply to such constructions?

> Hmm, I wonder...  if KGT p.49 applies to {joy'} "torture" - and we
> have no examples in canon - could I say this even more succinctly:
> ? nqIq Sajoy'chu'

I wouldn't make that assumption. It says it occurs with "some verbs of
fighting"; torture is not one of those.

-- 
SuStel
http://www.trimboli.name/





home help back first fref pref prev next nref lref last post