On 1/27/2018 7:37 PM, nIqolay Q wrote:
On Sat, Jan 27, 2018 at 4:14 PM, mayqel qunenoS <mihkoun@gmail.com <mailto:mihkoun@gmail.com>> wrote:
Sometime ago, I had asked of a way to say "all of us", as if in "all of us like cats".
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.
maj.
However, I just had an idea, which I would like to discuss.
Why not write:
{vIghro'mey DImuSHa' maH Hoch} ? all of us love cats
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 {vIghro'mey DImuSHa' maH Hoch'e'}.
The fierceness with which people desire a /y'all/ in Klingon horrifies me. This is no different. There is no fundamental need to express this with a built-in phrase.
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}.
Indeed, you /should/ use just *maH.* If there's any ambiguity about /who/ loves cats, you can list who you're talking about.
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.
/Assuming/ this were something we wanted to say, I would expect it to be *maH Hoch,* not *Hochmaj.* Consider what we discover in KGT with area phrases (like *jIH 'em */area behind me,/ not **'emwIj*).
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}.
Yes. The head noun of the noun-noun is *Hoch, *so the phrase is third-person. Kinda works against using this as a substitute for /we all./ -- SuStel http://trimboli.name