tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Feb 17 18:38:02 2004

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]

Re: Using -wI' on stative verbs?

Steven Boozer ([email protected]) [KLI Member] 

quljIb wrote:
> >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".

That's exactly how I would translate it.  Others on this list, though, 
would argue for {rorbogh ra'uSma} "Ra'ushma who-is-fat" on the basis of 
SkyBox S8:

   yIntaHvIS qeylIS'e' lIjlaHbe'bogh vay' batlh 'etlhvam chenmoHlu'pu'
   this sword of honor descends from the time of Kahless the Unforgettable.

I think {-bogh} is used here because this epithet is a bit more 
complicated:  {qeylIS'e' lIjlaHbe'bogh vay'} "Kahless, whom no one is able 
to forget" which is an entire object-verb-subject string.

Quvar:
>We just had some discussion about appositions, so I would suggest to say:
>
>   {*ra'uSma* ror}
>   "Fat Ra'ushma"
>   (which I think is the basically the same)

Not exactly, other than the information that s/he's fat.  {rorwI'} "the fat 
(one}" is being used as an epithet, or type of title, in apposition to the 
name, like Ivan the Terrible or Frederick the Great.  Notice how the 
epithet is capitalized in English, which indicates it's not just a simple 
adjective.  {ra'uSma ror} only means "fat Ra'ushma" (uncapitalized).

>{rorwI'} can still be used though:
>
>   {'Iv ghaH rorwI'vetlh'e'}
>   "Who is that fat one?"

Agreed.



-- 
Voragh
Ca'Non Master of the Klingons

Back to archive top level