tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Thu Jan 01 11:39:31 2004

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: Resources

Philip Newton ([email protected]) [KLI Member] 

On (No, or invalid, date.), "Regina Reusser"
<[email protected]> wrote:

> ngabwI':
> > {nuqDaq 'oH paSlogh'e'}
> 
> jIyajbe'... qatlh "nuqDaq bIH paSlogh'e'?" jIghItlhlaHbe'?

I wondered that, too, at first :)

Since {paSlogh} is glossed as "socks" in TKD, I presume it's an
inherently plural noun like {ngop} or {cha}.

TKD says about those:

  Inherently plural nouns are treated grammatically as singular nouns
  in that singular pronouns are used to refer to them (sections 4.1,
  5.1). For example, in the sentence {cha yIghuS} "Stand by
  torpedoes!" or "Get the torpedoes ready to be fired!" the verb
  prefix {yI_}, an imperative prefix used for singular objects, must
  be used even though the object ({cha} "torpedoes") has a plural
  meaning.

(TKD section 3.3.2, p. 24)

This brings up the question, if {jengva'} is the singular of {ngop} and
{peng} is the singular of {cha}, what's the singular of {paSlogh}?

According to a conversation I had with 'ISqu', "We don't know". loQ
qay'.

Incidentally, we also read in KGT:

  Another grammatical feature of Klingon about which children
  frequently become confused involves nouns that are inherently
  plural, such as {cha} ("torpedoes") and {ngop} ("plates [for
  eating]"), as opposed to their singular counterparts {peng}
  ("torpedo") and {jengva'} ("plate"). Instead of using the special
  plural forms, children tend forms [sic] plural of these words by
  simply adding the plural suffix {-mey} to the singular forms
  ({pengmey}, {jengva'mey}), as would be done with most other nouns
  (except for those referring to body parts or to beings capable of
  language, for which {-Du'} and {-pu'}, respectively, would be used),
  such as {yuQmey} ("planets"). Adults also add -mey to these nounds,
  but they do so to indicate that the items are scattered about
  ({jengva'mey}, "plates scattered all over the place"). For children
  who say {jengva'mey}, it apparently means simply "plates"; that is,
  it is nothing more than the plural form of {jengva'}. Children seem
  to be aware of the existence of the inherently plural forms,
  however, for they use them as well, though usually with the suffix
  {-mey} superfluously appended: {chamey} ("torpedoeses"), {ngopmey}
  ("plateses"). Inherently plural nouns are considered singular as far
  as how they fit into the overall grammatical structure. Thus the,
  singular pronoun {'oH} ("it") is used for both {jengva'} ("plate")
  and {ngop} ("plates") in sentences such as {nuqDaq 'oH jengva''e'?}
  ("Where is the plate?") and {nuqDaq 'oH ngop'e'?} ("Where are the
  plates?"; {nuqDaq}, "where"). Children, however, tend to use the
  plural pronoun {bIH} ("they") with {ngop} (as well as with
  {jengva'mey} and the redundantly suffixed {ngopmey}): {nuqDaq bIH
  ngop'e'?} ("Where are the plates?").

(KGT pp 33f.; The Fiction of Klingon Conformity > Regional Variation >
Generational Variation)

So if I understand the grammar correctly, if you say {nuqDaq bIH
paSlogh'e'?}, you make the same mistake as many Klingon children. If
that's any comfort to you :)

Incidentally, the same problem exists in English, as well; some people
say "The data is ..." even though prescriptively, it should be "The data
are..." since "data" is a plural noun in Latin (with singular "datum").
And some people even do the {ngopmey} thing in English: see
http://www.google.com/search?q=%22datas+are%22 , for example (17000 hits
for this "redundantly suffixed" word, though many, apparently, from
sites written by non-native speakers of English, judging by the domain
names).

(Also in the other direction: "pease" -- for small green round
vegetables -- used to be collective singular but was later understood as
a plural noun "peas" and given a singular "pea".)

Philip

Back to archive top level