tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Thu Jan 12 08:23:32 1995
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: HolQeD 3.4. -wI'
- From: [email protected]
- Subject: Re: HolQeD 3.4. -wI'
- Date: Thu, 12 Jan 1995 16:22:13 +0000 (GMT)
- In-Reply-To: <[email protected]> from "William H. Martin" at Jan 11, 95 11:02:49 am
>
> According to David Barron:
> >
> > ~marc, charghwI',
> > I would like your opinion on Prochel's proclaimation that -wI'
> > can be added to a verb to mean "one who is" as in HeghwI' "dead man".
>
> He also mentioned Heghpu'wI', which struck me as MUCH better.
> To me, HeghwI' means "one who dies", which doesn't tell you
> much since all of us fit that description.
>
> > Do you feel this is acceptable tlhIngan Hol?
>
> Basically, Okrand makes exceptions from time to time when he
> creates words and Proechel wants the right to do the same thing
> any time he wants. I'm surprised he doesn't note the typos in
> TKD and conclude that it is okay to omit the apostrophe in
> {-'egh} and that a lowercase {S} is okay. Basically, he is yet
> another person discontent to learn and use the language, much
> more interested in making it his own by changing it wherever he
> feels he can justify doing so.
>
> Using his own interpretation of {-wI'} meaning "one who is", I'd
> call him {QIpwI'}.
>
> > --
> > David Barron || [email protected] || lup Hoch yIyInqu'
> > Klingon Language Postal Course || qaStaHvIS wa' lup
> > P.O. Box 37, Eagle ID 83616 || yInpu' wa'netlh yInmey
> > IT'S FREE
On Page 164, the suffix -wI' is defined as ONE WHO IS, one who does, thing which
does....so I am prepared to accept that line of thinking.....
-- toDbaj
-----------------------------------------------------------
| $$$$$ ,$$$$$ ,$$$$$ $ |
| $$$$ ,$$ $ ,$$$$$ ,$$ $ |
| $$$$ $$ $$$$$ $$$ $$ $$ $$ |
| $$$$ ,$$ $ $$ ,$$ ,$$ $ |
| $$$$ $$$$$ $$ $$$ $$$$$ $ |
| $$$ ,$$$ $$ ,$$ ,$$$ |
| $$$ $$$$$$$$$ $$ $$$$$$$ $$$$$$$$$ |
| $$$ $$$ $$ $$ $$$ |
-----------------------------------------------------------