[tlhIngan Hol] pluralizing groups of beings capable of language

[Felix Malmenbeck]

> I am working with Dr. Okrand on correcting errors in
> the paq'batlh for a 2nd edition,

buy'qu' ngop! There's so much material in that book; an updated edition (and the comments that arise from it) could be a splendid regerence.

//loghaD
________________________________
From: tlhIngan-Hol <tlhingan-hol-bounces at lists.kli.org> on behalf of De'vID <de.vid.jonpin at gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, August 17, 2020 1:18:28 AM
To: tlhIngan-Hol
Subject: Re: [tlhIngan Hol] pluralizing groups of beings capable of language



On Tue, 7 Jan 2020 at 17:26, Felix Malmenbeck <felixm at kth.se<mailto:felixm at kth.se>> wrote:

== qorDu' ==

paq'batlh seems to go both ways with this word:


maHvaD lojmItmey tIpoSmoH
SoHvaD tuqlIj vInoblaH
batlh Hegh qorDu'lI'

ghe'torDaq lengbe'meH
qorDu'wI' vIQan
muyonmoH bortaS neH


qorDu'wIj quvmo' jImaghpu'
qorDu'wIj quvqa'moHlu'meH
jIvang vIneH

reH tlhIngan tlhIH 'e' yIqaw
pewuv'egh
qotar vImuv qorDu'wIj vImuv


It could be that there is some distinction, perhaps similar to referring to soldiers as {mangpu'} or {negh} depending on if you are speaking of them as individuals or not.

On the other hand, paq'batlh contains quite a few mistakes, so that is another possibility.

I am working with Dr. Okrand on correcting errors in the paq'batlh for a 2nd edition, and I can confirm that {qorDu'lI'} and {qorDu'wI'} are errors and will be fixed to {qorDu'lIj} and {qorDu'wIj}.

Here's the relevant quote:

--- begin quote ---
{qorDu'} should be considered something that is not capable of language (though its individual members, of course, might be... and normally are).
--- end quote ---

--
De'vID
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.kli.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol-kli.org/attachments/20200817/af0e3db1/attachment-0016.htm>