[tlhIngan Hol] Decomposed plural persons

De'vID de.vid.jonpin at gmail.com
Sat Jun 22 10:06:06 PDT 2019

On Sat, 22 Jun 2019 at 17:29, Daniel Dadap <daniel at dadap.net> wrote:

> > On Jun 22, 2019, at 09:39, De'vID <de.vid.jonpin at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > {Qu' DataghDI' 'aqtu' mellota' je tIqaw.} (TKW p.187)
> 'aqtu' mellota' je vIlIjlaw'pu'!
> Okay, seems pretty clear that multiple {ghaH}s can be considered to be
> {chaH} for the purposes of {moHaq rom}, which makes me feel better about my
> initial assumption. It would still be interesting to see examples where
> there is disagreement between whether the prefix and at least some of the
> people it refers to are first/second/third person, if they exist, since the
> examples you cited were both third person all around.

{matay' jIH molor tuq je}, {Sutay' SoH molor tuq je}
(msn.onstage.startrek.expert.okrand, Sept. 1, 1997)

There's also this apparently erroneous sentence, spoken by Uhura:
{Qob lIb bam SoH chuDlI' je} [sic] (Star Trek Into Darkness)

I'm fairly certain that {lIb} was invented to cover for {lI-} (it-you
(plural)) being used mistakenly in place of {bo-} (you (plural)-it). Okrand
apparently felt that a dropped prefix error (which maybe can even be
excused as "clipped") is better than a wrong prefix error.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.kli.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol-kli.org/attachments/20190622/49710ba7/attachment-0004.htm>

More information about the tlhIngan-Hol mailing list