[Tlhingan-hol] being capable of language suffix class - property of noun, or referent?

[De'vID jonpIn]

Quvar:
>> On proof for this is the slang expression {Ho'} for "hero, idol", which
>> will be {Ho'Du'} and {Ho'wIj} even when used to refer to a person.

SuStel:
> There are many examples of this. Another is how pot handles are called
{DeSqIvDu'}, even though they're not body parts.
>
> Using a word or suffix appropriate to the referent instead of the noun
may not be wrong, but it will call strong attention to what you've done.

maj.  It seems clear it would be {wIvwIj} even if {wIv} referred to a
person.

A related question: is it {cha'DIchwI'} because {cha'DIch} in this sense
refers to a person (i.e., it isn't quite the same word as the ordinal
number "second"), or is it {cha'DIchwIj} (because it's the same word as the
number and follows the logic of {wIv})?

--
De'vID
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://stodi.digitalkingdom.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol/attachments/20120510/7eca7dc1/attachment-0001.html>