On 29 December 2016 at 16:05, Lawrence M. Schoen <klingonguy@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, Dec 29, 2016 at 9:52 AM, SuStel <sustel@trimboli.name> wrote:
*A mut is not a thing capable of using language. Its members are, but it is not. It is an abstraction.*
I see your point, but I respectfully disagree. Metaphorically, we treat groups as possessing the attributes of language users all the time.
In English. Do we do that in Klingon?
The Borg Collective express outrage at latest Star Trek film.
Barbers Union presses for more Bolians in new Trek series.
Readers of Schoen's fiction ask if elephants can really talk.
Translate any of the above or similar statements into Klingon and the group is clearly understood to be made up of language users and no one would blink twice at the figurative use of extending that attribute to the group.
In the case of something like "readers", they're clearly {laDwI'pu'} and it's not just metaphorical. They're literally beings capable of language. But for words like {DIvI'} or {tuq} or {mut}, the plural should clearly use {-mey}, even if they're collections of things which are capable of language. -- De'vID