tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Thu Nov 09 17:15:55 2000

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

plurals (was Re: Grammar Highlight Each Day)

jIja'pu':
> There is no category defined in Klingon grammar as "a being not capable of
> language".  For the purposes of applying suffixes to indicate plural nouns,
> the categories are "beings capable of language", "body parts", and
> "everything else".  {-mey} is the "everything else" plural suffix.

ja' peHruS:
> Here ghunchu'wI' is incorrect.  There is a fourth category of plural
>which he
> has failed to mention at all.  Even it is divided into two types of
>plurals.
> The category is inherent plural.  This category contains both words which
> have no singular and words which have a different form in the plural.

One:  I was quite deliberate in my choice of words above.  I was very
careful to refer to "applying suffixes to indicate plural nouns" in
order not to complicate the situation beyond the categories associated
with the three plural suffixes defined in TKD.  I left out irregular
plurals by intent and by design, because they do not involve applying
suffixes to indicate plural nouns, and are not relevant to the
categories I was discussing.

Two:  Words having irregular plural forms (such as {jengva'} "plate" or
{vIj} "thruster") are not in the "inherent plural" category.  The term
"inherent plural" applies to a noun which indicates multiple things but
is treated as singular for the purposes of grammar.  The irregular
plurals themselves ({ngop} "plates", {chuyDaH} "thrusters") can be
called inherently plural, but that's not what you said.

> I'll touch on these in the Grammar Highlight soon enough.

As exceptions to the basic rules, irregular plurals do seem appropriate
for special mention in a "highlight" feature.

-- ghunchu'wI' 'utlh

Back to archive top level