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

[Lieven Litaer]

Some of the examples are good, but I don't agree with others.
For instance, I always say {latlhpu'} when talking about "the others", 
when they're people.

> Qov:
>  > I think wIvmey/wIvpu' for animate choices is akin to "It is my
> choice" vs. "He is my choice."

I don't agree here, I see the word "choice" as an inanimate, not living 
being. It is an act of a decision or choosing, it's not the thing being 
chosen. I would say "He is my choice" like {wIvwIj ghaH}. You are 
"referring" to that person, but the person is not "a choice". (If you 
use the person as a chair, you would say {quSwIj ghaH})

For wa'DIch, it's something else. It's some kind of a title, like {SoS} 
or {HoD}. {cha'DIchwI' ghaH} "He is my Chadich."

> you don't think it's weird if someone referred to his {wIvpu'} if it
> refers to a group of people?

This sounds wrong to me, it sounds like a bunch of decisions, which are 
able to speak.

Just fooling around, I just tried other words:
"You are my phaser"
I would surely use {pu'wIj} here. A phaser is a thing. If I call you a 
phaser, then I call you a thing.

BTW, I'm not talking about neologisms or technical things. Rules might 
be different there, like some people say "mouses" or "foots".

I think all of this is just my sense of klingon language, I didn't find 
any canon examples.

Lieven.