tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Oct 05 12:09:34 2004

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

• Index by Date
• Index by Thread
• Index by Author

Re: ??Hoch Satlho'qu'

Steven Boozer ([email protected])

• From: Steven Boozer <[email protected]>
• Subject: Re: ??Hoch Satlho'qu'
• Date: Tue, 05 Oct 2004 14:09:22 -0500
• In-reply-to: <[email protected]>

QeS lagh:
> >> Hoch Satlhoqu'!
> >
> > Is this possible? Can one have a second person direct object pronoun 
> prefix
> > when there's only an explicit direct object (therefore third person)?

lay'tel:
>qechvam yIqel:  Hoch!  Satlho'qu'!

Exactly.  This isn't the "prefix trick" or a double object, but a form of 
direct address no different from {matlh, qatlho'} "I thank you, 
Maltz":  The name, or some other epithet, is in apposition to the elided 
(or unstated) pronoun which is the actual object of the verb.  Taking 
advantage of the prefixes and the peculiarities of {Hoch}, you might be 
able to say:

   Hoch [tlhIH], Satlho'.
   I thank all of you. I thank you everyone. (collectively)
   "Everyone/All of you, I thank you (pl.)"

   Hoch [SoH], qatlho'.
   I thank each of you. I thank every one of you. (individually)
   "Each/Every one of you, I thank you (sg.)"

Of course, this all hinges on whether {Hoch} can precede a pronoun like 
this.  IOW this is the "all of us" problem: *{Hoch maH} or *{maH Hoch}?



-- 
Voragh
Ca'Non Master of the Klingons 

• References:
  • Re: ??Hoch Satlho'qu'
    • From: [email protected]

• Prev by Date: Re: tu'HomI'raH - canon source?
• Next by Date: Re: Klingon WOTD: chuyDaH (n-pl)
• Previous by thread: Re: ??Hoch Satlho'qu'
• Next by thread: Klingon WOTD: chuyDaH (n-pl)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread
  • Author

Back to archive top level