[tlhIngan Hol] inherently plural nouns when they are implied

De'vID de.vid.jonpin at gmail.com
Wed Jun 1 09:46:48 PDT 2022

On Wed, 1 Jun 2022 at 16:55, D qunen'oS <mihkoun at gmail.com> wrote:

> SuStel:
> > You can substitute pronouns for nouns, and you can elide pronouns
> I wasn't aware of that. I thought that the thing elided was decided by
> context. So, just to see if I understand this correctly:
> nIHIvpu' Ha'DIbaH; DaqaDpu'mo', nIHIvpu'.
> the animals attacked you; because you provoked them they attacked you.
> If I understand correctly, the elided subject of {nIHIvpu'} is they/chaH,
> and *not* {Ha'DIbaHmey}, right?

Unless these animals are beings who can use language, the elided pronoun is

See TKD section 6.2.1 on compound sentences. Even though that section is
talking about two sentences joined with a conjunction, it's equally
applicable to multiple sentences.
<When the subject of both of the joined sentences is the same, the English
translation may be reduced to a less choppy form, but Klingon does not
allow this shortening. The pronominal prefix must be used with both verbs.
[...] When a noun (as opposed to simply a verbal prefix) indicates subject
and/or object, there are some options in Klingon. In its fullest form, a
Klingon sentence repeats the noun [...] It is possible, however, to use
pronouns rather than nouns in the second of the joined sentences. [...] If
the context is clear, even the pronoun may be left out.>

So "by the book", you're first replacing the noun with a pronoun, and then
eliding the pronoun. But it's splitting hairs to insist that this isn't the
same as just eliding the noun.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.kli.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol-kli.org/attachments/20220601/99a33a44/attachment-0002.htm>

More information about the tlhIngan-Hol mailing list