tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Thu Feb 21 16:22:45 2002
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: agentive -wI'
- From: [email protected]
- Subject: Re: agentive -wI'
- Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 21:22:44 GMT
I wanted to stay out of this, but when I tried translating it all for
charghwI', he got upset.
Basically, {-wI'} is a very simple tool for a very simple purpose. It is like a
fast bluebird. Don't admire its speed and then try to strap it to a cart and
use it as a pack animal.
It really is a lot like "-er" in English. We have the word "killer". We don't
have a word for "able-to-killer", or "killeder". It works for bare verb stems.
It works for {-moH} in some cases. It probably works with {-Ha'}. That's pretty
much as far as it can go. I wouldn't even use it with {-be'}.
Follow the good advice to use {-bogh} or even use multiple, smaller sentences
to handle more complex ideas.
Will
> From: "Sean M. Burke" <[email protected]>
>
> > I've got a wee question about -wI'. In The Klingon Dictionary, I see
> > examples of it which are all of the form VERBROOT-wI'. However, can one
> > have other verb affixes?
>
> I see no reason why not, with one exception:
>
> > ?HoHlu'wI' -- he/she who is killed
>
> There has been debate on this before. The problem here is that while /-wI'/
> turns the verb into a noun representing the original doer of the verb, with
> /-lu'/ the verb HAS no doer. /-wI'/ doesn't magically start to refer to the
> verb's object.
>
> > And just maybe some shade of meaning could be imparted by pronoun
> prefixes,
> > a` la Iroquois semi-nominals?
> >
> > DughojmoHwI' - he/she who teaches you(singlular)
>
> Okrand says (HolQeD 3:3 I think) that prefix-verb-maybesuffixes-ghach
> doesn't work; I tend to believe that prefix-verb-wI' doesn't either. What
> is */jIghojwI'/?
>
> > And while we're at it, what's "teacher"? ghojmoHwI'? Would that argue
> for
> > allowing -wI' with other verb affixes, at least in lexicalized cases?
> > (Assuming "ghojmoH" is lexicalized.)
>
> Who cares if it's lexicalized? Okrand put verb+suffix combinations in the
> dictionary to assist the English word lookup, not to represent what Klingons
> consider indivisible words. There's no reason these don't work.
> /ghojmoHwI'/ makes perfect sense.
>
> SuStel
> Stardate 2143.4
>