[99054] in tlhIngan-Hol
Re: [Tlhingan-hol] emphasizing noun suffixes
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Steven Boozer)
Wed Jun 25 11:16:14 2014
From: Steven Boozer <sboozer@uchicago.edu>
To: "tlhingan-hol@kli.org" <tlhingan-hol@kli.org>
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2014 15:16:07 +0000
In-Reply-To: <CABDLMbUMFocDeg8LDsL_Cw+t4TLcXTGnhkeWAmSCqnNJEW3ZAQ@mail.gmail.com>
Errors-To: tlhingan-hol-bounces@kli.org
Andre:
> Plurals are different, though, {paqmey} surely isn't lexicalized. So
> {paqmeyna'} would only stress that it's definitely BOOKs (not other
> objects), all the objects have the definite quality of being a book,
> each. I don't think it can mean that they're definitely a multitude of
> items called book (as opposed to one single book). I admit it's quite
> subtle to show these differences of what exactly the suffixes are
> referring to, sometimes. It's often vague and ambiguous but doesn't
> cause misunderstanding, since it's often clear anyway.
>
> That's my interpretation, judging from my understanding of Klingon
> grammar. Perhaps there are some examples in Klingon canon that shows
> undoubtable what exactly {-na'} or other suffixes refer to.
Previously known examples of N3 suffixes together with plural suffixes on the same noun:
QaghHommeyHeylIjmo'
due to your apparent minor errors. TKD
qorDu' lurDechmeyna' pab tlhInganpu'
With strong [Klingon] family traditions... S13
Duypu'qoqchaj
their so-called emissaries TKD
Have I missed any?
--
Voragh
Ca'Non Master of the Klingons
_______________________________________________
Tlhingan-hol mailing list
Tlhingan-hol@kli.org
http://mail.kli.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol
