<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 1/27/2018 7:37 PM, nIqolay Q wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAG84SOuV6JWgZd+b_shvgKnqJrqcH-SYQinVnoL0=PNPzdR4aQ@mail.gmail.com">On
Sat, Jan 27, 2018 at 4:14 PM, mayqel qunenoS <span dir="ltr"><<a
href="mailto:mihkoun@gmail.com" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">mihkoun@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div dir="auto">Sometime ago, I had asked of a way to say "all
of us", as if in "all of us like cats".
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">In particular, I had asked if we could write
{vIghro' DImuSHa' Hoch}. And as we had said back then, we
can't say something like this because it would violate the
accord rule.</div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">maj.</div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">However, I just had an idea, which I would
like to discuss.</div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">Why not write: </div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">{vIghro'mey DImuSHa' maH Hoch} ?</div>
<div dir="auto">all of us love cats</div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">Does it violate any rule ? I think it is
correct and grammatical. Let alone that we could place an
{-'e'} on the {Hoch} for added emphasis, thus writing {<span
style="font-family:sans-serif">vIghro'mey DImuSHa' maH
Hoch'e'}.</span></div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<br>
<p>The fierceness with which people desire a <i>y'all</i> in
Klingon horrifies me. This is no different. There is no
fundamental need to express this with a built-in phrase.</p>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAG84SOuV6JWgZd+b_shvgKnqJrqcH-SYQinVnoL0=PNPzdR4aQ@mail.gmail.com">
<div>
<div style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif"
class="gmail_default">I think there's a few instances of "all
of us" in paq'batlh that were just translated as {maH} or some
first-person-plural prefix, so you could probably get away
with just {maH}. <br>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
<p>Indeed, you <i>should</i> use just <b>maH.</b> If there's any
ambiguity about <i>who</i> loves cats, you can list who you're
talking about.</p>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAG84SOuV6JWgZd+b_shvgKnqJrqcH-SYQinVnoL0=PNPzdR4aQ@mail.gmail.com">
<div>
<div style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif"
class="gmail_default">But if it's important to convey the
specific notion of "all of us", then {maH Hoch} "the entirety
of us" is probably an acceptable way to express that basic
idea. If {maH Hoch} works, then {Hochmaj} might be even
better. <br>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
<p><i>Assuming</i> this were something we wanted to say, I would
expect it to be <b>maH Hoch,</b> not <b>Hochmaj.</b> Consider
what we discover in KGT with area phrases (like <b>jIH 'em </b><i>area
behind me,</i> not *<b>'emwIj</b>).<br>
</p>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAG84SOuV6JWgZd+b_shvgKnqJrqcH-SYQinVnoL0=PNPzdR4aQ@mail.gmail.com">
<div>
<div style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif"
class="gmail_default">
That said, as you've got it written, it still violates the
rule of accord. The subject is {Hoch}, not {maH}, so you'd
still use a third-person-subject prefix. {vIghro'mey muSHa'
maH Hoch/Hochmaj}.</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p>Yes. The head noun of the noun-noun is <b>Hoch, </b>so the
phrase is third-person. Kinda works against using this as a
substitute for <i>we all.</i><br>
</p>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
SuStel
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://trimboli.name">http://trimboli.name</a></pre>
</body>
</html>