tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sat Aug 20 05:29:02 1994
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: "love"
- From: "Kevin A. Geiselman, Knight Errant" <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: "love"
- Date: Sat, 20 Aug 1994 17:14:02 -0400 (EDT)
Unto all assembled,
The problem I have with <bang> being only a noun translated "one who is
loved" is in its single canon usage. There it is <bangwI'>. the <-wI'>
is added to a VERB to make a NOUN that means "that which does whatever".
If <bang> is only a noun then not only is <bangwI'> gramatically
incorrect, it is needlessly redundant.
Without knowing in advance what <bang> meant, I would have to infer from
it's usage in <bangwI'> that it was a VERB and that <bangwI'> is "one who
<bang>s" (so to speak).
So, <bang> must also be a VERB, or at least must once have been a verb
from which the usage <bangwI'> would have evolved.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kordite, Intelligence Officer, IKV Dark Justice, Klingon Assault Group