tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri Sep 15 14:21:03 1995
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: }} wI' and pronouns.
- From: "William H. Martin" <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: }} wI' and pronouns.
- Date: Fri, 15 Sep 1995 14:21:03 -0400 (EDT)
According to Matt 'I am man, hear me watch Seinfeld' Treyvaud:
>
> Y'ello
>
> Two questions:
>
> 1) Can wI' be used with all other verb suffixes and/or supporting words?
> Eg {Salpu'wI'} = That which has ascended, or {SalwI' rIntaH} = That which
> has ascended, and will not/cannot return?
To add to ghunchu'wI''s answer, yes, you can, though it is not
usually a stylistically great thing to do. It becomes very easy
to create a word that means one thing to you and something very
different to someone else, or that is just plain obtuse to
anyone else. You can explain to them why you thought it was a
great word and you can explain how you built it, but that won't
make it really useful in the normal sense of what words do.
Basically, use whatever suffixes you need to make the verb mean
what you want it to mean, then add {-wI'} to make it the being
which does this thing. And note that it nominalizes much like
the English "-er" and similarly sounds weird when you are using
it for something other than naming a noun that is named by the
thing it generally does. In English, would "had ascendeder"
make sense to you? Well, that's about how much sense
{Salpu'wI'} makes in Klingon. It is not technically incorrect,
but it is probably not the kind of word one would usually use
to describe a being.
> 2) Can any verb suffixes you like be used when pronouns are used to mean 'to
> be'? Eg {jIHpu'} = I was being, I was?
ghunchu'wI' said it right. The only further note is that when
you add a verb suffix to a pronoun, it is then a verb and not a
noun in its behavior. Pronouns can act like nouns or like
verbs, but not both at the same time.
> Thanks,
> Matt
charghwI'
--
\___
o_/ \
<\__,\
"> | Get a grip.
` |