[91225] in tlhIngan-Hol
Re: [Tlhingan-hol] list of inherent plurals
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Rohan Fenwick - QeS 'utlh)
Sat Dec 10 05:32:42 2011
From: Rohan Fenwick - QeS 'utlh <qeslagh@hotmail.com>
To: <tlhingan-hol@kli.org>
Date: Sat, 10 Dec 2011 20:32:28 +1000
In-Reply-To: <CA+7zAmPm0bXWdHKt2FFMTMyFwFmKM98K=Pj=aKffdu2zi22n=g@mail.gmail.com>
Errors-To: tlhingan-hol-bounces@stodi.digitalkingdom.org
ghItlhpu' De'vID, jatlh:
> Are there any others?
jang'egh, jatlh:
> I just remembered {Duj} (both singular and plural},
I must confess here that I was quite bemused by the debate that took place
over whether {Duj} in the sense of "instinct" was singular or plural. Be
careful to remember that *all* Klingon nouns that have no other marking
are not actually singular, but are unmarked for number. I quote TKD:
"In Klingon, a noun without a plural suffix may still refer to more than
one entity. The plurality is indicated by a pronoun, whether a verb prefix
(see section 4.1) or a full word (section 5.1), or by context."
(TKD pp.21-22)
So {Duj tIvoqtaH} is "trust your instinct*s*" only because of the plural
prefix {tI-}. I think it could just as easily have been {Duj yIvoqtaH}
with the meaning "trust your instinct" (as well as "trust your ship").
taH:
> {QaS} (corresponds to no known singular},
Same as {Duj}. I quote again, from KGT this time:
"Accordingly, when dealing with a troop member (QaS) or officer (yaS)
of a ship..." (KGT p.51)
Note the use of "*a* troop member" here, which I think indicates {QaS} is
perfectly fine to be used as a singular. Perhaps it could also be glossed
as "enlisted man", as opposed to "officer" ({yaS}).
QeS 'utlh
_______________________________________________
Tlhingan-hol mailing list
Tlhingan-hol@stodi.digitalkingdom.org
http://stodi.digitalkingdom.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol
