[tlhIngan Hol] pluralizing epithets

[Hugh Son puqloD]

> On Sep 27, 2019, at 07:55, SuStel <sustel at trimboli.name> wrote:
> 
>> On 9/27/2019 7:04 AM, mayqel qunen'oS wrote:
>> Since we don't know, what exactly a {petaQ} or a {yIntagh} is, I know
>> that probably there's no answer.
>> 
>> But I wonder..
>> 
>> How would you pluralize the {petaQ}, {yIntagh}, {toDSaH}, etc ?
>> 
>> Would you use {-pu'} or {-mey} ?
> paq'batlh has petaQmey, referring to people.
> 

But what if they were just scattered all about? Within the context of the paq'batlh verse, I don’t think such a reading is excluded:

nItlhejbogh petaQmey
   tInuD chaHvaD
   nIb yan wIjwI' jan je

(Not saying that a “scattered all about” meaning was indeed intended, just that I don’t think this example is conclusive, so we likely still just don’t know.)

The English translation says “Look at these p’takhs at your side” - “at your side” could be interpreted literally (as a small group standing beside you, not scattered) or figuratively (your supporters). In the previous chapter, this happens:

ruS cherDI' 'Iw
   SIqral bIQtIq lughos cha' parmaqqay'
   pa' ghomta' SuvwI' 'ej pa' loS chaH

My reading of the context is that those whom Molor is calling {petaQmey} are the {ghomta'bogh SuvwI'} (pl.). Since they have gathered, they’re clearly not scattered all about as a diaspora throughout the land, but they might still be scattered all about the camp. Do we have any canon clues to suggest how scattered lamguage-capable beings need to be before {-mey} isn’t considered an insult?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.kli.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol-kli.org/attachments/20190927/010b0753/attachment-0002.htm>