tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Jan 30 23:48:36 1995

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing



[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]

Re: KLBC: QutneS ghIth: Part 3



> >> "nuq bonejneS SoH juplI' je?"
> 
> >Interesting point here. The {bo-} seems to address both people
> >together in the second person, but {SoH juplI' je} addresses
> >them individually, one in the second person and one in the
> >third. Does anyone with more experience with languages with
> >distinct singular vs. plural second person pronouns want to
> >shed light on this?
> 
> Well.  It's an interesting one, I'd say.  The simple answer, and the one
> I'm inclined to follow in Klingon, is that this is correct usage.  After
> all, "tlhIH" is "those plural addressed", and often considered in many
> languages to be "you and another" (cf. Cherokee, charghwI').  I can see how
> you're saying it's different from "maH" being "jIH SoSwI' je", since "maH"
> need not have the same sense of all the members being first person as you
> might expect tlhIH to be all second person (man, I'm explaining this really
> poorly.  It's a tough concept, and it keeps shifting when I think about
> it).  Whatever.  I'm inclined to buy it as is.
> 
> ~mark
> 
Now, German - my native language - does distinguish
the two pronouns (at least if you drop the -neS).
The concept seems quite clear to me:
You have a subject, which is composed of several
nouns joined by a noun conjunction.
The verb prefix reflects the grammatical subject,
so it must be plural.

In English you'd surely say
What WERE me and my mum looking for?
Not: *What WAS me and my mum looking for?

The same goes for second person.
So I'm inclined to think, there's no other way,
though I'm not a linguist, and may be proven wrong.

			Marc 'Doychlangan'

--
----------------------------------------------------
Marc Ruehlaender	[email protected]
Universitaet des Saarlandes, Saarbruecken, Germany
----------------------------------------------------


Back to archive top level