tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Feb 16 22:44:01 2004
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: Using -wI' on stative verbs?
- From: [email protected]
- Subject: Re: Using -wI' on stative verbs?
- Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2004 22:33:41 -0500
ghItlh voragh:
>Philip was right to be cautious, as the vast majority of {-wI'} nouns
>are, in fact, derived from transitive or action verbs. But ngabwI'
>correctly points out that they can also be derived from qualities,
>although the number of canonical examples is much, much smaller.
>
>Look at KGT p. 152 for three of these:
>
> This word [Hom] literally means bone, but its slang usage is no doubt
> influenced by the noun suffix {-Hom}, a diminutive that adds a meaning
> of smallness or lack of importance... There are a number of standard
> counterparts to {Hom}, such as {pujwI'} ("weakling"), {langwI'} ("one
> who is thin"), and {runwI'} ("one who is short").
>
>Here's another one (KGT 159):
>
> The nonslang term for an expert is {po'wI'} (literally, "one who is
> expert, skilled").
>
>A couple of examples in sentences:
>
> pujwI' HIvlu'chugh quvbe'lu'
> There is no honor in attacking the weak. TKW
>
> reH Hegh yoHwI'pu''e'
> Always it is the brave ones who die. TKW
>
>So we have the option of saying either {pujwI'} "weakling" or {nuv/loD/be'
>puj} "weak person/man/woman" etc.
I used {ror} in this manner once is a story I wrote, many moons ago. In it was a character; ra'uSma rorwI', i.e. "Ra'ushma the Fat".
quljIb