[Tlhingan-hol] -nIS : whose volition?

[Robyn Stewart]

Once again I am seeking to satisfy the widest possible range of competent
Klingon speakers with my interpretation of TKD and canon for the beginners'
course.

We know from TKD that type 2 verb suffixes represent the volition of the
subject to perform the action of the verb. We also have the sentence from
Star Trek V: DungDaq legh 'ej QotnIStaH romuluSngan be'pu' = Romulan women
belong on their backs. Clearly in this sentence Korrd is not describing the
actual volition of Romulan women, nor what he believes about what they
personally need, but his own opinion, what they would need to do to satisfy
him, similar to us saying, "That food needs to be in my belly."

I think I say and hear things like this in Klingon all the time.  Are we
correct? Is Korrd's line an aberration or regionalism? Would you feel it
correct or incorrect to advise beginners to avoid this usage? 

Would you accept the sentence:

jagh mernIS bachlIj.  

Clearly the shot itself has no volition, it is the speaker (addressing the
gunner) who has the need.

Discuss.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.kli.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol/attachments/20140529/4010a08b/attachment.html>