[tlhIngan Hol] veQpu' or veQmey ?

[Lieven L. Litaer]

Am 16.05.2019 um 11:09 schrieb mayqel qunen'oS:
> I start by writing {veQ Human}, but as the passage continues, I choose
> occasionally to write {veQ} only.

I would say {Human veQ} parallel to {tlhIngan SuvwI'} or {verengan Ha'DIbaH}

> I realize, that perhaps in english you wouldn't pluralize the "trash";
> but humor me, because the issue here isn't *this* particular example.

That's actually a good question. I don't know any canon examples for
{veQ} confirming this, but I guess it's not countable, such as {bIQ}.

> The issue here, is "if you needed to pluralize a noun, which refers to
> people, but that noun wasn't capable of language, would you use {-pu'}
> or {-mey}" ?

I would base this on the explanation in KGT, p. 152, with the word {Ho'}
which is a slang term for "hero", but means "tooth:

//
Grammatically, even as slang, {Ho’} follows the rules appropriate to its
literal meaning. Thus, even though it may refer to a person, its plural
is {Ho’Du’} ("teeth"), making use of the plural suffix for body parts
({-Du’}), not {Ho’pu’}, with {-pu’}, the plural suffix for beings
capable of using language. Similarly, it never takes the possessive
suffixes associated with beings capable of using language.
//

--
Lieven L. Litaer
aka the "Klingon Teacher from Germany"
http://www.klingonisch.de
http://www.klingonwiki.net/En/ST5