tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Jan 11 21:06:26 1995
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: HolQeD 3.4. -wI'
- From: [email protected] (David Barron)
- Subject: Re: HolQeD 3.4. -wI'
- Date: Wed, 11 Jan 1995 22:06:19 -0700
At 05:57 PM 1/11/95 -0500, Mark E. Shoulson wrote:
>>Date: Tue, 10 Jan 1995 14:31:55 -0500
>>Originator: [email protected]
>>From: [email protected] (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".
>
>>Do you feel this is acceptable tlhIngan Hol?
>
>I actually haven't fully read the article... mostly because I dread the
>visceral reaction I'll have when I do (and I hope I can get a proper
>response in a letter to Lawrence)... -wI' on nouns indeed!
NOw, the article was not THAT bad. He *DID* site TKD to back up his argument.
So please READ IT AND COMMENT!
>
>But I do agree that -wI' can go on *any* verb... even "stative" verbs.
SO does this mean that langwI' can mean "the thin man"?
It would be nice but I havent ever heard it argued.
And the only positive argument for this in TKD is the list of suffixes in the
back of the book.
>'e' vIHar. HISlaH.
>
>~mark
>
>
David Barron
[email protected] OR [email protected]
Klingon Language Postal Course
PO Box 37, Eagle ID 83616
IT'S FREE! Send Self-Addressed Stamped Envelope.
Not available by E-mail, so dont ask.