Style and numbers; Was KLBC: Noun Suffixes with Numbers

["William H. Martin" <whm2m@virginia.edu>]

On Fri, 10 Dec 1999 06:47:42 EST J242110559@aol.com wrote:

> jIjatlh:
> >wa'Daq jIboghpu'. I was born in one.
> 
> jang pagh:
> >your last example (wa'Daq jIboghpu') probably does not
> >work very well in Klingon. In this case, you're not using "one" as a number,
> >but just as a place holder for wherever it is you were born. Of course, you
> >might have been saying "I was born in [room number] one", but I suspect not.
> >I would expect Klingon to use the actual noun rather than "one" in a
> >sentence like this: <pa'Daq jIboghpu'>. For a similar example, when offering
> >candy to someone, I would normally hold out a few in my hand and say "Want
> >one?" in English. In Klingon, I would probably just say <neH'a'?>, omitting
> >the noun entirely.
> 
> I was thinking that {wa'Daq jIboghpu'} might be used in a situation like the 
> following:
> 
> nuv 1: DujDaq jIboghpu'.
> nuv 2: wa'Daq jIboghpu' je.
> 
> Perhaps a better example would be:
> 
> Sa' 1: cha' yuQmey mangghommey vIghaj.
> Sa' 2: wejDaq mangghommey vIghaj jIH'e'.
> 
> - DujHoD

Remember that in TKD, Okrand explains to us that Klingons do not 
have any negative connotations to explicitly repeating nouns, 
especially when it would give clarity. Just as a style point, 
I'd much more likely say:

nuv 1: DujDaq jIboghpu'.
nuv 2: DujDaq jIboghpu' je.

I would tend to use a number when the number of items is a 
significant bit of information, and here, one would not expect 
you to be born on more than one ship. In ST3, Kruge did say, 
<<wa' yIHoH. jISaHbe'.>> Meanwhile, he was clearly telling his 
soldier to kill not two and not zero, but one of the prisoners. 
He didn't care which one. So it wasn't important if it was the 
man or the woman. It was just important that it was one prisoner.

That's why the soldier started to kill the woman, but when the 
man attacked him and defended the woman and he killed the man 
instead, he was satisfied. He had fulfilled his command. He had 
killed {wa'}.

Your second example is better, though you apparently goofed on 
the suffix for {yuQ}. Also, note that adding an explicit {jIH} 
already indicates emphasis on the subject. Adding {-'e'} to that 
really is overkill. You said:

Sa' 1: cha' yuQmey mangghommey vIghaj.
Sa' 2: wejDaq mangghommey vIghaj jIH'e'.

I'd prefer to say:

Sa' 1: cha' yuQDaq mangghommey vIghaj.
Sa' 2: wej yuQDaq manggommey vIghaj jIH.

Note that this is as much a matter of style as acceptable 
grammar. Certainly, omitting the noun {yuQ} works grammatically, 
but we are talking about PLANETS here. Part of the boast is that 
these locations are PLANETS and not just some unmentioned 
entities.

Additionally, I'm not completely certain that there are any 
canon examples of numbers (which are chuvmey, after all, even 
if they are being used as nouns) have taken noun suffixes in 
canon. I have vague memories of voragh coming up with an 
example, but it is early yet and sleep is a luxury I haven't had 
much of lately.

charghwI'