On Jun 8, 2018, at 20:56, Felix Malmenbeck <felixm@kth.se> wrote:

Sorry if I missed it, but have you considered using the word «lIn»? This seems to be the sort of context that it was made for: One where there isn't a provider and a beneficiary, but a set of equal parties: «qo'vam wIlIn.»

That's exactly what I was about to suggest.

On Fri, Jun 8, 2018 at 10:24 PM, Daniel Dadap <daniel@dadap.net> wrote:

You didn’t miss it, as I hadn’t mentioned it, but I chose not to use {lIn} because I wasn’t sure if it could be used with a simple subject (in this case, {maH}, as opposed to, e.g. {vay', latlh je}), and while neither {qo' wIlIn} nor {maHvaD qo' wIbon} quite captured what I was going for, {maHvaD qo' wIbon} seemed closer.

If you can tell me how you want "we share a thing" and "we share a thing with each other" to mean two different ideas, I might be able to give you a suggestion for how to say them. But in general, and definitely in this specific context, I don't think "with each other" adds anything to the meaning. Usually the simplest and most descriptive way in Klingon to say "X does something with Y" is to say "X and Y do something", which is just what {wIlIn} does for a literal "we share it with us".

-- ghunchu'wI'