[tlhIngan Hol] verb prefix on XvaD Y ponglu' construction when Y is plural

[D qunen'oS]

jIH:
> But immediately I realized that the word "panatheneans" is plural; I
can't translate it
> exactly in English, but it's like saying "the all Athenses". And by
saying "Athenses" I mean
> the plural of the word "Athens". As if there are many cities, each by the
name of
> Athens, and we're meaning all of them.
De'vID:
> According to John Dryden's translation of Plutarch's Theseus, the name
"Panathenaea"
> means "(the sacrifice of) all the united Athenians". But whether it
refers to people or cities,
> it's in any case plural (in Greek).

I think what Dryden does, is describe the event which was happening during
that festival, rather than the literal meaning of the word (which was my
intention to describe). Although I can't translate it exactly in English,
since it can be applied as a term to many things. But yes -as you wrote-
it's always plural.

De'vID:
> This doesn't really answer your question, but it really depends on
whether the
> Klingon (or Klingon speaker) is aware that the original word was plural,
and whether
> they care. Words which are plural in one language are sometimes borrowed
into another
> language as singular.

Yes, this is true.

My confusion on this matter came as a result that my greek mind couldn't
reconcile seeing {yupma'vaD panatheneans ponglu'} with the fact that the
word is plural. On the other hand though, when I thought of the {yupma'vaD
panatheneans luponglu'}, the problem became that I was given the impression
that this festival had many names.

De'vID:
> yupma'vamvaD «Hoch *aten-nganpu' yupma'»
> ponglu'. 'elaDya' Hol lo'lu'DI', «Panathenaea» jatlhlu'.

This is a nice suggestion, but again the problem would be that the
"panathenea" can refer to the city instead of the people. Of course one
could argue, that in the festival it's the people that actually participate
and not the buildings.

I don't know.. Perhaps I'm overthinking this. It's tempting though to just
write {yupma'vaD panatheneans luponglu'} basing this choice on the accord
(if I understand correctly what this is..).

But yes, I know that one could say that "we don't know for sure if the
accord applies to foreign words too". But think of it this way; if I wanted
to say "the spartans defeated the opponent", then I'd surely write {ghol
lujeypu' spartans}, obviously treating the foreign word as plural. So why
not do the same for the "panatheneans"?

Anyway, I'll just stop now since this all gave me a headache.

Thank you SuStel, De'vID, fergusq, and loghaD for sharing your thoughts on
this matter.

-- 
Dana'an
https://sacredtextsinklingon.wordpress.com/
Ζεὺς ἦν, Ζεὺς ἐστίν, Ζεὺς ἔσσεται· ὦ μεγάλε Ζεῦ
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.kli.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol-kli.org/attachments/20220707/a6f45141/attachment.htm>