tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Dec 28 10:07:59 1999

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: re: re: adverb suffixes ?? /KLBC

On Mon, 27 Dec 1999 16:45:30 -0500 Daryl Quick 
<> wrote:

> > >> ja' pIl'o': 
> > >> > LOL. Actually, {nItebchoH veng} means, "The cities fill you." 
> I see that it means that considering that you dont always have to pluralize the noun for it to be plural.  (in this case <veng>)
> and the they <nI-> would show it as plural
>  but couldn't that be taken as "the city's <populous> fill you?
> after all veng is singular,... <nI> refers to they(verb)you 
> and you can refer to a city as its people or as its entirity (+buildings and such)
> so the they could be the populous...
> "the city's <populous> fill you"
> ...or do you (anyone) think I'm reaching??
I think you are reaching. Collective nouns are grammatically 
singular in Klingon. If the plural verb prefix is correct, 
{veng} has to be plural. The plural suffix would be omitted 
quite commonly in Klingon. Why be redundant? We know city is 
plural because of {nI-}. Do we have to tell you it is plural 
AGAIN? Klingon is not nearly as redundant a language as English 
or most other human languages.
> >> >ghungHa'choH'a' *Godzilla? 
> >> 
> >> ghobe'. Cincinnati Soppu'bogh vetlh Delba'. 
> >> 
> >> -- ghunchu'wI' 'utlh 
> >ja' pIl'o
> >Qu'vatlh! DaH yabwIjvo' vIteqlaHbe' bomvetlh. qatlho'Ha'. 
> nuq bom? *godzilla*?
> chavta'ngav


Back to archive top level