tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri Sep 24 08:08:49 2004

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: De'wI'wIj vIngu'; pagh vIngu''a'? (Re: Skype

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

lay'tel SIvten:
> > jatlhlaHqu'bej puqbe'wI', 'ach jatlhlaHbe'chugh, {-wI'} vIlo' vIneH.

Quvar:
>Are you saying that if she would not be able to speak, you'd use {-wI'}
>anyway?

Absolutely.  The criterion is not "able to speak" but "capable of using 
language":  i.e. not temporary ability, but inherent capability; not 
speech, but language.  Although an infant or mute may be unable to speak, 
they are still capable of using language - the infant grows up and learns 
to speak; the mute can hear speech, read, write and use sign language.

>That's a good point. {-wIj} is used for things only. Computers and vIlInHoD
>do speak to, but they are not "able to speak".

Bottom line:  Use {-wI'} for people, {-wIj} for things.

Sentient androids (like Data) are probably considered honorary 
people;  computers (and pets) are definitely considered things.



-- 
Voragh
Ca'Non Master of the Klingons

Back to archive top level