tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri Jul 11 23:40:02 1997
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: We are klingons
"William Cody" <[email protected]> writes:
><thlIngan maH> WOULD mean "We are Klingon", as in the Klingon race. To say
>"We are Klingons"plural, would have to be <tlhInganpu' maH>. Without the
><-pu'> it would not grammatically correct to say it means "We are
>Klingons"plural. Well??
The *very* *first* entry in The Klingon Way is "We are Klingons" --
{tlhIngan maH}. It is entirely, perfectly, absolutely grammatical.
There are exactly two places that I can think of in Klingon grammar
where the plural-marker suffixes are not completely optional.
1 - When asking a question with {'ar}, the noun it follows *never* has
a plural suffix. This is explained in TKD.
2 - When using {Hoch} before a noun, a singular noun implies the meaning
"each", and a plural noun implies the meaning "every". This information
was revealed by Okrand rather recently.
Everywhere else, the lack of a plural suffix does not by itself indicate
that the noun is singular. If the verb reveals that the word is plural,
or other context makes it plain, then the plural suffix is superfluous.
There's nothing wrong with putting it there, but it is not necessary.
-- ghunchu'wI'