tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri Nov 17 23:25:33 2000

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

RE: plurals (was Re: Grammar Highlight Each Day)

Wow. An argument that doesn't involve me! Imagine that!

Well, doesn't involve me so far, anyway.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Thursday, November 16, 2000 8:46 AM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: plurals (was Re: Grammar Highlight Each Day)
>
>
> In a message dated 11/9/2000 7:16:26 PM Central Standard Time,
> [email protected] writes:
>
> << 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.

It is true that ghunchu'wI' has introduced the term "irregular", which is
not mentioned at all by Okrand in his descriptions of this aspect of
grammar. I see where the temptation springs from to use the term
"irregular", but it probably does not add any clarity to this discussion. In
TKD, Okrand refers to the plural forms of these words as inherantly plural
nouns and the singular counterparts of these words are simply other nouns.
One is not an irregular form of the other. They are actually different
nouns.

The closest English equivalents I can come up with are like "gaggle" is not
an irregular form of "goose". It's another noun. It just happens to
represent plural geese. If you were to refer to a singular member of a
gaggle, you'd be talking about a goose.

>  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.
>   >>

Well, using Okrand's terminology, these are not irregular plurals. They are
inherantly plural nouns with other nouns referring to singular examples of
the item grouped with the inherantly plural noun.

> DaH chomISmoH.  Although {ngop}, as an example of an "inherent
> plural," does
> not use any "suffix" to indicate its plurality, I still think of it as a
> plural form.  This does not make them irregular, only a different
> category.
> As to how to treat them grammatically, so far I have not seen a grammar
> highlight talking about them.  You are correct--from what I have
> been able to
> discern from TKD--that Klingon grammar treats them as singular when
> conjugating a verb.

bIqar.

> While you say you have been really careful and deliberate, it seems to me
> that you are picking on the grammar highlights any chance you
> get.  I would
> like to see people comment constructively on learning Klingon.
> Furthermore,
> your attitude makes me want to pick on anything I can find wrong in your
> postings.  I don't like this feeling; I don't really want to do this.

Hoch vIvuv vIneH 'ach ghu'vam vIQIjtaHvIS, Qatlhqu' Qu'vam.

ghunchu'wI' really cares about the language. He also cares about the
community of its speakers, and he and peHruS have a long, colorful history.

peHruS also cares about the language, though at times, it seems like he is
far more interested in being a leader than he is in anything else. It's like
he came to the Klingon language in order to be a leader of men. In the
beginning, he wanted to make radical changes to the language and lead the
rest of us away from the shackles of Marc Okrand. He met major resistance
and gave up on that idea. Then, he wanted to lead beginners, giving lessons
here on the list long before he had the skill levels with the language to
pull this off. Others leapt in to defend the language and to defend
beginners from misleading materials he presented.

There were some really ugly arguments. What's going on right now is really
tame. Just look in the archives. Name calling. Insults. Curse warfare
without the underlying respect for the enemy. Ugly stuff. I was involved.
Krankor. Holtej. ghunchu'wI'. At one time or another, anyone who is anyone
with the language has been in a state of rage with peHruS. I know of no
grammarian or BG who has not, at one time or another, lost control during
exchanges with peHruS.

Meanwhile, over the years, peHruS has gotten much better with his
understanding of the language and his use of it. He's still leaping out
there, trying to be a leader, just like always, and for those who have had
battles with him in the past, it is emotionally difficult to watch that
without wanting to once again defend the language from misinterpretation and
once again defend the beginners from misleading materials.

It is arguably inappropriate for anyone other than the BG to be so actively
presenting large volumes of material aimed at beginners. Meanwhile, anything
that inspires discussion is good. Just remember out there that as far as
official voices are concerned, on this list, Mark Shoulson (Seqram or ~mark)
is the grammarian and Tad Stauffer is the Beginners' Grammarian. The rest of
us are just peer participants. We do jockey for position now and then,
trying to claim more authority than we have, but none of us have authority
beyond our ability to convince people of stuff.

I understand why peHruS is posting what he is posting and I understand why
ghunchu'wI' is responding as he does. I think we need to cut them both equal
amounts of slack. Both of them are being far nicer to each other and to us
than they have in the past.

I'm trying to be nicer, too. It's the main reason I changed my name. My old
name seemed to draw arguments beyond my control to evade them.

> yIghoHtaHQo'!  tlhIngan Hol taghwI'pu'vaD pab chovnatlhmey tIpoj!
>  tIDub neH!
>  tIpovmoH!
>
> Xardana

SarrIS

Back to archive top level