tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Dec 10 09:52:29 2007

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing



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

Re: Prefix and noun agreement (was: usage of type-7 aspect suffix {-pu})

MorphemeAddict (MorphemeAddict@wmconnect.com) [KLI Member] [Hol taghwI']



In a message dated 12/10/2007 10:03:42 AM Central Standard Time, 
david@trimboli.name writes:

> On the other hand, one might conclude that since {no'} "ancestors"
> refers to a plural noun, *{no'wI' chaH no'lI''e'} must be fine; it makes
> perfect sense. However, it's wrong: the correct sentence is {no'wI' ghaH
> no'lI''e'} "your ancestors are my ancestors," however weird that looks.
> (This came up on the MUSH the other day.) It doesn't make sense, but 
> that's the way it is.
> 

This is explicitly stated in TKD 3.3.2:
  Inherently plural nouns are treated grammatically as singu-
lar 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.

lay'tel SIvten   </HTML>






Back to archive top level