[90753] in tlhIngan-Hol
Re: [Tlhingan-hol] plural of
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (David Trimboli)
Thu Nov 17 15:43:26 2011
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2011 15:42:48 -0500
From: David Trimboli <david@trimboli.name>
To: tlhingan-hol@stodi.digitalkingdom.org
In-Reply-To: <CAFK8js1=ODEm7jX+Rxj4P0FgOFvmgWzGjROF5PSTtY0gOi7Eyg@mail.gmail.com>
Errors-To: tlhingan-hol-bounces@stodi.digitalkingdom.org
On 11/17/2011 3:30 PM, ghunchu'wI' 'utlh wrote:
>
>> Now, this raises the question: if Klingons had<qam wovmoHwI'[mey]> which
>> they refer to as<qam> in the abbreviated singular, is the plural of the
>> abbreviation<qammey> or<qamDu'>? The above suggests<qammey>, but OTOH we
>> have examples of body parts being used metaphorically to refer to
>> non-body-part objects having plurals in<-Du'> (e.g.,<DeSqIvDu'>,<jIb
>> Ho'Du'>).
>
> Those are strong suggestions that the choice of plural is based on the
> word itself and not on how it's used. However, we also have the
> contrary example of {DIr} getting {-Du'} as a literal body part and
> {-mey} as a more generic reference. Add the observation that<qam> is
> just acting as an attributive noun for the missing plural object, and
> I would lean heavily toward<qammey> here.
KGT has {veDDIrmey}, but whence do you get {DIrDu'}?
--
SuStel
http://www.trimboli.name/
_______________________________________________
Tlhingan-hol mailing list
Tlhingan-hol@stodi.digitalkingdom.org
http://stodi.digitalkingdom.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol
