[tlhIngan Hol] {DeSqIv} and {noq}

Lieven levinius at gmx.de
Tue Apr 4 01:36:14 PDT 2017

Am 04.04.2017 um 09:45 schrieb De'vID:
> I just noticed something odd.

The same was given for the word {neb}, which is {nebDu'} in anatomy and 
{nebmey} on rockets.

> In KGT, we were told this about {DeSqIv}:

Yes, KGT also says about the slang term {Ho'} for "hero":

Even as slang, {Ho'} follows the rules appropriate to its literal 
meaning. Even though referring to a person, its plural is {Ho'Du'}

Do we have any other examples of this kind?

> Previously, some people have taken this to imply that body parts were
> a noun class in Klingon, and that body part words take the {-Du'}
> suffix even when not referring to a body part.

Yes, I think KGT is clear on this even mentioneing the term "rule".

> But {noq} seems to contradict this.
> What's going on here? Is one or the other of {noq} or {DeSqIv} an
> exception to the rule, and if so, what's the rule?

I usually base the rules on the statistical majority of examples, but in 
this case, I have two examples this way, two the other way.

I suggest following the "basic rule" exmplained in KGT and see these two 
words as exceptions or homonyms you just have to memorize.

(out of the game: KGT was written 20 years ago, so maybe Okrand just 
didn't remember what he wrote their precisely - or he did intentionally?)

(a side note: We talked about something similar at qepHom'a', when 
Okrand mentioned a term used in movie production, lamps standing on a 
"foot", and people would talk about "foots" instead of "feet". I just 
don't remember the end of the discussion. I think we agreed on saying 
{De' jengva'mey}, altough the plural of jengva' is ngop.)

> Or does each body
> part word work differently when used to refer to a non-body-part in
> the plural, and it's just something you have to memorise?

That would not be wrong to do, as it is based on something we are told.
{DeSqIvSu' ghaj nevDagh}
{noqmey ghaj ghu balmey}

> Incidentally, the online version of the qep'a' booklet where {noq} was
> given seems to have disappeared:

I do. I'll send it offlist to you.

Lieven L. Litaer
aka Quvar valer 'utlh
Grammarian of the KLI

More information about the tlhIngan-Hol mailing list