tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Feb 25 18:08:52 2002

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: agentive -wI'

From: "qe'San (temp ADSL email)" <>
> > You don't use {-wI'} to build new words for things
> > that are not likely to become common terms.
> Who decides which words fit that description.. I'm probably taking this
> of context and I appologise if I am but are you saying I can't use
> for watcher (as in the Buffy or Highlander series) and have to use "person
> who watches" instead?

Curiously, one of Will's defending points is that he doesn't want people to
speculate on things he doesn't think are true, thoughts for which he can
provide evidence for, because he doesn't want to taint the impressionable
minds of those not already in the know.  Heaven forbid some newbie sees talk
of using prefixes on words ending in /-wI'/ and tries to do it himself.
This is curious because you have demonstrated the effect in reverse: he's
stating his OPINION so voraciously that you have begun to believe it to be
fact (or at least, begun to doubt that it's an opinion).

Will has indeed provided evidence to support his views, but he is NOT an
authority on what is and is not in the Klingon language.  The purpose of
this list should be to discuss Klingon (and speak in Klingon), not to
enforce it.  I myself have tried to stop people from taking too far an idea
that seemed to me to be obviously wrong, and I regret that, even though I
STILL think most of it is wrong.  We are not Klingons, and we should not be
trying to . . . ahem . . . conquer it.  If someone WANTS to talk about why
he thinks verb prefixes on words ending in /-wI'/ are okay, he should be
allowed to without being shouted down.

Go ahead and use /bejwI'/.  It means "watcher."

Stardate 2154.6

Back to archive top level