On 1/6/2022 8:09 AM, luis.chaparro@web.de wrote:
De'vID:
QInvam luHevpu''a' latlh? pIm'a' QIn? *Spam*Daq tetlhvam lulochbogh HochHom QIn'e' vIHev, Landau Martin je QInmey vIHev je. pImbe'.
By the way, two short questions:
1. Should *HochHom QIn* be considered singular or plural?
Unclear. We might suppose that *HochHom X* follows the same rule as *Hoch X:* including a plural suffix means to take most of the X's as a whole, while leaving off a plural suffix means to take most of the X's individually. I would guess, in that case, that the plurality of the phrase depends on whether there is a plural suffix. But we don't know for sure if *HochHom* follows the same rule; I suggest it only as a default position to take.
2. I guess there is nothing wrong with *(noun noun je) + noun* as a noun-noun construction? Are there canonical examples?
Nothing wrong with it. A canonical example comes from /paq'batlh:/ *vaSvamDaq tuq veng je quvvaD Heghqangbogh SuvwI' tu'be'lu''a'* /Is there nobody in this hall Prepared to die for the honor Of your tribe and city?/ -- SuStel http://trimboli.name