[tlhIngan Hol] Does rIntaH require a sentient being ?

De'vID de.vid.jonpin at gmail.com
Fri Mar 8 22:50:13 PST 2019

On Fri, 8 Mar 2019 at 22:51, Will Martin <willmartin2 at mac.com> wrote:

> Doing it as {vIje’ rIntaH jIH} only makes sense if, given that written
> Klingon as we know it is phonetic spelling of spoken Klingon, somehow
> {rIntaH} has become a Type 10 suffix, so it always follows the verb and its
> other suffixes, and any subject would follow it. Otherwise, I see no
> justification for {rIntaH jIH}, since as a sentence, it would have to be
> {jIrIntaH jIH}.

If it's acting like a suffix, then it's surely acting like a type 7,
namely, the {-ta'} that it's replacing. Since we have no examples of a type
8 ({-neS}) or type 9 following {rIntaH}, and the way we write Klingon is a
phonetic transcription of how it's spoken, {vIje' rIntaH jIH} might as well
be {vIje'rIntaH jIH} where {-rIntaH} is a two-syllable type 7 suffix.
Indeed, since {ta'} "accomplish" and {taH} "continue" are verbs, one might
speculate that they were verbs which became suffixes. Perhaps {rIntaH} is
undergoing a similar evolution, but has resisted full assimilation as a
suffix because it's two syllables.

But until we have a canon (counter)example either way, we can't tell.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.kli.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol-kli.org/attachments/20190309/0a2c70f6/attachment-0004.htm>

More information about the tlhIngan-Hol mailing list