[tlhIngan Hol] how is the {mapIm ngIq maH} correct ?

[nIqolay Q]

On Wed, Oct 2, 2019 at 9:14 AM SuStel <sustel at trimboli.name> wrote:

> As with all noun-noun constructions, it's the final noun in the series
> that determines what "thing" you're talking about. Here, *maH* is acting
> like a noun and is the final noun. So the phrase *ngIq maH* *each of us
> individually* is in the first person. We're talking about *us.* What kind
> of *us?* The *taken-as-individuals us.* *mapIm ngIq maH* is correct.
>
I'm not sure *ngIq maH* is quite correct for *each of us individually* in
this case. So far in canon, *ngIq* seems to have only been used with
singular nouns. To me, if we applied the examples strictly, *ngIq maH*
would mean something like *each group-of-us individually*, as if there were
multiple groups of "us" ("us-es") and we were considering each group of
"us" one by one. In that one TNG episode that ends with a couple hundred
Enterprises from parallel universes appearing, each with their own Picards
and Rikers and Worfs and so on, it might make sense for the Enterprise crew
to refer to multiple groups of "us" like that. On the other hand, there are
still some questions about how to talk about things like "each of us" or
"all of you" and so on. Maybe with a plural noun, *ngIq* can mean "each of
the things that make up the plurality" rather than "each of the plural
groups", so *ngIq maH* would mean what it's supposed to mean.

Whatever *ngIq maH* means, and whether it's the correct way to write *each
of us*, *maH* would still be the head noun of the phrase, so it would make
sense to have a *ma-* prefix on the verb.

(Incidentally, was there ever any traction on adding grammar question
requests to the qep'a' *chabal tetlhmey*, like we have with vocabulary?)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.kli.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol-kli.org/attachments/20191002/2efdb706/attachment.htm>