[tlhIngan Hol] {DeSqIv} and {noq}

[SuStel]

On 4/4/2017 5:58 AM, De'vID wrote:
> But the point is that there is no existing rule. It's implied that
> when body part words are used with slang meanings, or to refer to
> things which are analogous to body parts, they remain grammatically
> body parts. People assumed a rule based on a few examples, but it now
> seems that we have about the same number of counterexamples.

Right. We have suggested a rule based on the KGT examples, but for my 
part I have always qualified it as speculative. We now have 
counterexamples, suggesting this is not a general rule—the grammatical 
genders of "being capable of using language," "body part," and 
"everything else" are not necessarily baked into the nouns themselves, 
but may depend on which noun and what circumstance the plurals are being 
used.

Whether Okrand simply forgot about words like {DeSqIvDu'} I don't know, 
and it doesn't really matter. We know enough to say that we can't draw 
any firm conclusions about this subject without explicit guidance.

-- 
SuStel
http://trimboli.name