And just to add one more element to the discussion, isn’t {paq’batlh} poetry? We’ve been specifically told that in poetry, the plural suffixes are not bound by normal rules of grammar. Admittedly, that was in reference to the rare, poetic use of {-mey} on body parts, but in TKD, for either beings capable of language or body parts, using {-mey} always refers to the “scattered all about” meaning, either in poetry or normal speech. There’s no reference to it being intentionally used as an insult in TKD or the Addendum. … not that it wouldn’t be insulting… There’s just no mention of it in TKD. We can rationally deduce that it would be insulting to be referred to as a thing incapable of language, but we don’t know that Klingons actually think that way. So far as we can tell, they’d just assume that if you refer to {nuvmey} when you don’t mean “scattered all about”, then maybe you are just an idiot who doesn’t know how to speak Klingon. charghwI’ vaghnerya’ngan rInpa’ bomnIS be’’a’ pI’.
On Sep 27, 2019, at 11:45 AM, Steven Boozer <sboozer@uchicago.edu> wrote:
I had the same thought as Luciano: {petaQ} may have originally been some sort of disgusting creature or thing, which is why it’s pluralized with {-mey} in the same way that {DeSqIvDu’} “elbows” is also used for V-shaped pot handles (KGT p.97). But as SuStel says, we have no way of knowing.
For comparison, more than one animal - even when used to refer to people - is {Ha’DIbaHmey} in the paq’batlh:
ghoStaHvIS tam 'ej So' molor QaS HoS ram Ha'DIbaHmey rur They sneak and they creep, The men of mighty Molor, Like beasts in the dark. (PB)
DaqtaghlIj yIlel qeylIS ngemvamDaq Ha'DIbaHmey tIHoH wa' targh cha' tlhInganpu'qoq je Kahless, pull your d'k tahg, Kill the beasts in this forest, One a targ, and two who call themselves Klingon. (PB)
Note that {Ha’DIbaHmey} refers to two {tlhInganpu’qoq} “so-called Klingons” in the second example.
-- Voragh
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: SuStel
On 9/27/2019 11:03 AM, Luciano Montanaro wrote: As far as I know, petaQ is an insult, but the specific meaning has been withheld, probably to make it safe to use in a program for children. As such, we cannot desume that using -mey is an additional insult; as far as we know, a petaQ may be a disgusting animal, or thing, so -mey would be the grammatical correct way to pluralize it. Am I missing something here? I agree. We just don't have any data on which to speculate. All we know is that in paq'batlh Molor calls a group of assembled Klingons petaQmey.
_______________________________________________ tlhIngan-Hol mailing list tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org