vaj, naDev chaHtaHvIS no'ma', chutmey'e' chenmoHta'bogh qeylIS lajchu' so, while our ancestors were here, they followed the rules created by kahless 'a pIj, Qochmo' chaH, Suvchuq but often because they disagreed they fought each other vaj, wa' jaj, naDev nargh qeylIS 'ej jatlh so one day, kahless appeared and said Qo'noS puqpu', yISuvchuqQo' children of kronos don't fight each other 'a HeQQo' no'ma', 'ej SuvtaH.. but our ancestors refused to comply and continued to fight.. vaj, Qay'qu'choH qeylIS, 'ej jatlh.. so kahless got pissed and said.. wa' nuv le'Daq tlhIngan ghantoHmeyna' naQ vInob to one exceptional person I will give the entire klingon canon 'ej ghantoHmeyvam ghItlhDI', SIbI' peHeQchu' tlhIH'e' ! and this canon as soon as he writes, immediately you will all comply ! mu'meyvam jatlhtaHvIS qeylIS QomtaH chal tera' wutlh je.. and as he spoke these words all creation shook.. ghIq ngab then he dissapeared vaj, ghantoH pIn'a' quv mung 'oH wanI'vam'e'.. so, this is how the sacred institution of the ca'non master came to be.. mayqel q
mayqel, qatlho’. I don’t have a lot of time now, but a couple of things caught my eye: From: mayqel qunenoS < vaj, naDev chaHtaHvIS no'ma', chutmey'e' chenmoHta'bogh qeylIS lajchu' < so, while our ancestors were here, they followed the rules created by Kahless no’ is grammatically singular. So odd as it sounds, this should be naDev ghaHtaHvIS no’ma’ – although I suspect it’s a common enough mistake, which is likely why Okrand always warns against it: TKD 3.3.2: Inherently plural nouns are treated grammatically as singular nouns in that singular pronouns are used to refer to them (sections 4.1, 5.1). For example, in the sentence cha yIghuS Stand by torpedoes! or Get the torpedoes ready to be fired! the verb prefix yI-, an imperative prefix used for singular objects, must be used even though the object (cha torpedoes) has a plural meaning. KGT 34: Thus, the singular pronoun 'oH (it) is used for both jengva' (plate) and ngop (plates) in sentences such as nuqDaq 'oH jengva''e'? (Where is the plate?) and nuqDaq 'oH ngop'e'? (Where are the plates?). KGT 178: reH no' yIquvmoH Always honor your ancestors. KGT 178: yIquvmoH, Honor them! (actually, this is Honor him/her! ; the inherently plural noun no', ancestors, takes a singular pronoun). < Qo'noS puqpu', yISuvchuqQo' < children of kronos don't fight each other Use the plural imperative prefix pe- you (plural) [do something!] here: peSuvchuqQo’! BTW note the difference a comma makes in English: Children of Kronos, don't fight each other! (i.e. an order) Qo'noS puqpu', peSuvchuqQo'! Children of Kronos don't fight each other. (i.e. a statement) Suvchuqbe' Qo'noS puqpu'. Qapla’! -- Voragh Ca'Non Master of the Klingons
On 10/6/2017 2:13 PM, Steven Boozer wrote:
*From:*mayqel qunenoS *< vaj, naDev chaHtaHvIS no'ma', chutmey'e' chenmoHta'bogh qeylIS lajchu'*
*< *so, while our ancestors were here, they followed the rules created by Kahless
*no’*is grammatically singular. So odd as it sounds, this should be *naDev ghaHtaHvIS no’ma’* – although I suspect it’s a common enough mistake, which is likely why Okrand always warns against it:
This is correct, although we've never gotten a canon example of specifying an inherently plural noun with a pronoun. I have a theory that *no' ghaH* is not actually the correct form. I believe we've seen evidence that a group like a *qorDu'* is not considered a being capable of using language, even though it is made up of individuals who are. Perhaps inherently plural nouns like *no'* work the same way. In that case, it's *qempa' ghaH*/he/she is an ancestor/ and *no' 'oH*/they are ancestors./ -- SuStel http://trimboli.name
participants (3)
-
mayqel qunenoS -
Steven Boozer -
SuStel