tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Dec 13 09:18:34 1995
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: Klingon on Internet Relay Chat
>Date: Tue, 12 Dec 1995 09:54:57 -0800
>From: "d'Armond Speers" <[email protected]>
>On Mon, 11 Dec 1995, Alan Anderson wrote:
>> maSqa' writes:
>> >*Maine*Daq SuvwI' bIr chaH Hoch SuvwI''e'
>> >(does that use {Hoch} correctly?)
>ghunchu'wI'vo':
>> I don't think so. {Hoch SuvwI'} would mean "everyone's warrior",
>> and I think you wanted to say "all warriors". The standard use
>> of {Hoch} here is {SuvwI' Hoch}, "all of the warriors". I'm not
>> quite sure this "partive" construction follows the noun-noun rule
>> in TKD, but it's canon.
>If you take noun-noun (N1-N2) as "N2 _of the_ N1", then it works. "All
>_of the_ warrior(s)". It may also be seen as comparable to the question
>/X 'ar/. But this pattern cannot be extended to the partitive
>construction in the general sense. /SuvwI' wej/ can only mean "guard #
>three". Unless, of course, we find out about some new grammar rule.
You're probably correct. Note, though, that "wej" is a *number*, while
"Hoch" is a *noun*, so it stands to reason that they may work differently.
We have canon support for "SuvwI' Hoch" == "all of the warriors", from the
Skybox card ("... tera' vatlh DIS poH cha'maH wej HochHom lo'lu'taH" for
"most of the 23rd century." Okrand has said that indeed this is "HochHom"
intended to mean "almost all of").
~mark