[tlhIngan Hol] Mother's Day message from the Mother of the Klingon Empire

SuStel sustel at trimboli.name
Fri May 22 06:57:50 PDT 2020


This is an interesting one. It has some good information about clusivity 
in Klingon. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clusivity


On 5/22/2020 5:35 AM, De'vID wrote:

> {maH} means "we" — that is, "you (singular or plural) and I" and also 
> "he/she/they and I" and also "you (singular or plural) and he/she/they 
> and I."

*maH* is confirmed to lack clusivity.


> When the "we/us" prefixes are used, this sometimes gets clarified:
>
> {pI-} "we-you (singular)" and {re-} "we-you (plural)": "we" means only 
> "he/she/they and I," and none of the other "we" options
> {ju-} "you (singular)-us" and {che-} "you (plural)-us": "us" means 
> only "him/her/them and me," and none of the other options

*pI-* and *re-* agree with exclusive /we/ subjects. They can't agree 
with inclusive /we /subjects because the second person is the object.

*ju-* and *che-* agree with exclusive /we/ objects. They can't agree 
with inclusive /we /objects because the second person is the subject.

Basically, a first- or second-person pronoun cannot be both subject and 
object. You cannot say *jIH SoH je relegh jIH SoH je*/you and I see you 
and me./


> But not always:
>
> {ma-} "we (no object)": "we" can mean any of the options
> {wI-} "we-him/her/it" and {DI-} "we-them": "we" can mean any of the 
> options (though any third persons included in the subject are 
> different folks from those in the object)
> {nu-} "he/she/it/they-us": "us" can mean any of the options (with the 
> same third third-person restriction cited for {wI-} and {DI-})

*ma-, wI-, DI-* do not distinguish clusivity in the subjects they agree 
with.

*nu-* does not distinguish clusivity in the object it agrees with.

Since there is no duplication of the same first- or second-person 
pronoun in both subject and object, there is no clusivity.


> Maltz frowned and growled when I suggested {SuvwI' nulegh HoD} and 
> similar constructions. I guess this is one of those places where full 
> pronouns really ought to be used.

Music to my ears. I hate it when people try tricks like this. Prefixes 
agree with the person of the subject and object; they aren't the 
pronouns themselves.

-- 
SuStel
http://trimboli.name

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.kli.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol-kli.org/attachments/20200522/b7a6d6c5/attachment.html>


More information about the tlhIngan-Hol mailing list