[tlhIngan Hol] Pluralizing inherently plural nouns

nIqolay Q niqolay0 at gmail.com
Wed Aug 16 08:29:46 PDT 2017

On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 11:23 AM, mayqel qunenoS <mihkoun at gmail.com> wrote:

> Does adding the {-pu'} to the singular form of an inherently plural
> noun, as in the case of {mangpu'}, indicate "soldiers scattered all
> over the place" ?

No, why would it? {-pu'} doesn't have any notion of "scattered all about".
That's {-mey}.

> So, as I understand this - and someone correct me if I'm wrong - it
> isn't grammatically wrong to add a plural suffix, to an inherently
> plural noun; it is just that the resulting word/meaning is
> strange/awkward.

It sounds strange and awkward *because* it is grammatically wrong. It is,
in fact, possible for Klingons to say things that are not 100%
grammatically precise. That section of TKD is about such grammatical
errors, specifically the ones commonly made by children.

> The use of {bIH} with {ngopmey}, isn't grammatically wrong.

It is grammatically wrong, but the main error is the {ngopmey}, not in the
verb agreement. If {ngopmey} were an acceptable plural word, {bIH} would be
the proper word to go with it.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.kli.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol-kli.org/attachments/20170816/f982fb96/attachment-0004.htm>

More information about the tlhIngan-Hol mailing list