> So go back to Hoch maH. Do you take the

> set of us-es as each us performing the 

> action?

ok, I understand this argument.

But here is what confuses me:

Couldn't the {maH} in the {Hoch maH} construction, be understood as describing lets say ten klingons, thus making the {maH} equivalent to a plural noun ?

If context made it clear, that there are only ten klingons, then wouldn't we have: maH = ten klingons ?

So, if we can say {Hoch tlhInganpu'} to say "all klingons", then why not say {Hoch maH} for "all (of) us" ?

~

bara'qa'