[tlhIngan Hol] Pronominal prefixes compulsory?

[Steven Boozer]

(KGT, 172):  Except in formal situations, however, the omission of {lu-} in such cases is often overlooked. Though technically an error, and jarring to many Klingons' ears, it causes no confusion as to the intended meaning of the sentence. It is important to note that this does not mean that the use of {lu-} is optional; it is left off only under specific conditions.

--
Voragh
tlhIngan ghantoH pIn'a'
Ca'Non Master of the Klingons



> -----Original Message-----
> From: tlhIngan-Hol [mailto:tlhingan-hol-bounces at lists.kli.org] On Behalf
> Of mayqel qunenoS
> 
> I remember reading somewhere in klingonska that "klingons are very serious
> when it comes to using the correct verb prefixes"
> 
> Or something like that anyway..
> 
> On Sun, Jul 3, 2016 at 2:11 AM, Robyn Stewart <robyn at flyingstart.ca>
> wrote:
> > Felix' comparison with English conjugations is apt.  It sounds dumb
> > and is harder to understand if you don't use the correct prefix.
> >
> > If you want to leave something out, you could drop the plural suffix:
> > Doch lulegh ghot. From the prefix it's obvious that the subject will
> > be plural, so it's not necessary to make it explicit.
> >
> > - Qov
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: tlhIngan-Hol [mailto:tlhingan-hol-bounces at lists.kli.org] On
> >> Behalf
> > Of
> >> Felix Malmenbeck
> >> Sent: July 2, 2016 14:01
> >> To: tlhIngan Hol mailing list
> >> Subject: Re: [tlhIngan Hol] Pronominal prefixes compulsory?
> >>
> >> > You can see the subject is a group and the object is a single
> >> > thing, so is the prefix required at all?
> >>
> >> Yup. The rule of rom (KGT p.173) requires that prefixes agree with
> >> the subject and object.
> >>
> >> This is quite similar to English, where the verb must agree with the
> > subject.
> >> You can say "She speaks Klingon." and "They speak Klingon.", but not
> >> "She speak Klingon." and "They speaks Klingon."
> >>
> >> Now, the lu- suffix *is* sometimes dropped by speakers, but this is
> >> still considered an error, so it's not something I recommend.
> >>
> >> ________________________________________
> >> From: tlhIngan-Hol <tlhingan-hol-bounces at lists.kli.org> on behalf of
> > Jeremy
> >> Silver <j.silver at mupwi.demon.co.uk>
> >>
> >> Quick question for the po'wI'pu', if I have a sentence where both
> >> subject  and object is explicitly stated, like:
> >>
> >> Doch lulegh ghotpu'.
> >>
> >> You can see the subject is a group and the object is a single thing,
> >> so is the prefix required at all?
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> -- mupwI'