[tlhIngan Hol] "Seasons of Love" in Klingon / And two grammatical questions

[Will Martin]

I’d like a clarification. I sometimes have false memories, so I won’t assume that my memory that {HochHom X} would be plural (more than half of whole 0items in the group of items called X) and {X HochHom} would be singular (more than half of one item called X). When before the noun, I thought {HochHom} behaved grammatically like a number, and when following the noun, it acted more like a second noun in a noun-noun construction. I thought that {Hoch} worked the same way.

I’m guessing this is similar to numbers in general, since {vagh X} is five Xs, but {X vagh} is a specific item from a group of items called {X}, so that numbers indicate degree of plurality when preceding nouns, and describe a specific, singular noun when they follow it.

Again, I can’t cite any canon. I’m not getting all puffed up and righteous about this or seeking conflict or challenging authority. I just thought I understood how this works, and I see a description that doesn’t fit what I thought I understood.

pItlh

charghwI’ ‘utlh
(ghaH, ghaH, -Daj)




> On Jan 6, 2022, at 9:00 AM, SuStel <sustel at trimboli.name> wrote:
> 
> On 1/6/2022 8:09 AM, luis.chaparro at web.de <mailto:luis.chaparro at web.de> wrote:
>> De'vID:
>> 
>>> QInvam luHevpu''a' latlh? pIm'a' QIn?
>> *Spam*Daq tetlhvam lulochbogh HochHom QIn'e' vIHev, Landau Martin je QInmey vIHev je. pImbe'.
>> 
>> By the way, two short questions:
>> 
>> 1. Should *HochHom QIn* be considered singular or plural?
> Unclear. We might suppose that HochHom X follows the same rule as Hoch X: including a plural suffix means to take most of the X's as a whole, while leaving off a plural suffix means to take most of the X's individually. I would guess, in that case, that the plurality of the phrase depends on whether there is a plural suffix. But we don't know for sure if HochHom follows the same rule; I suggest it only as a default position to take.
> 
> 
> 
>> 2. I guess there is nothing wrong with *(noun noun je) + noun* as a noun-noun construction? Are there canonical examples?
> Nothing wrong with it. A canonical example comes from paq'batlh:
> 
> vaSvamDaq
>     tuq veng je quvvaD
>     Heghqangbogh SuvwI' tu'be'lu''a'
> 
> Is there nobody in this hall
>     Prepared to die for the honor
>     Of your tribe and city?
> 
> -- 
> SuStel
> http://trimboli.name <http://trimboli.name/>_______________________________________________
> tlhIngan-Hol mailing list
> tlhIngan-Hol at lists.kli.org
> http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.kli.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol-kli.org/attachments/20220106/d87b750f/attachment-0002.htm>