A Revised Discussion of the Kilrathi Language

Ok, I'm still reading through all of this but I have some questions already:

- What's the rule about assembling words? Here are some examples from European languages and I'd like to ask you what you think is how Kilrathi do it most often:
A typical example from German: "Katzenfutter" means cat food. It is assembled by using the plural of cat, and the word for food. For a German it is clear that it is food for cats, and not, for example, food made of cats. In Spanish or French they usually put it the other way round. They first write what it is, then what it is for. Also they use several several words, while in German you usually have one long word.
NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organization) is four words in English, in German it can be one word (although with a dash in it) "Nordatlantikpakt-Organisation", in French it is four words, but the other way round: "Organisation du Traité de l’Atlantique Nord"

From the words you posted I can see all of those. Which rules could apply?

I usually construct new words from smaller existing words in the simplest terms I can manage, and it's generally a direct line translation. Just yesterday for the Squire's Tale I had to come up with a word for "eloquence". After looking it up on simple.wiktionary.org, I found a definition of "quality of using language well and effectively" (if Simple Wiktionary fails, I usually go straight to standard Wiktionary at en.wiktionary.org ). I simplified that to "quality speak", looked up those words in the lexicon table - dikiquxi = "quality" and le = "to speak", and put them together: dikiquxile = "eloquent / eloquence".

Now as far as modifiers go, in the early going I was placing modifiers ahead of words and combining it into one long word, unless I thought it looked too long, at which point I broke it up; that length was arbitrary. Later I decided to put modifiers at the end of the word, again combining it into one long word unless it got to be too long (again, arbitrarily); some modifiers and concepts could only be applied as prefixes, and for those I kept the prefix. And anything having to do with numbers is always kept separate.

Prepositions are kept seperated from verbs and nouns and their objects follow. Conjunctions stay separate if joining parts of sentences, but form single long words if they form a list.

Take the "Who's on First" translation over at RSI - let's go with one of the longer lines; this is Costello talking:

Sivaska: Ni'nis nischur rah maks bahukormaga'a gararo, aiy'hrajhak'ha dohukormaga du ni'ahn maks dak'a'graga jaq. Eshma dak'a'graga'dakinhukormaga. Ja'lesh gar'dakinhukormaga, nai, bahukormaga'aki, ni'h'asdokil talan du lanbraj ar. Konis, ni'bhahukormaga maks dogar du ja'lhra?

is the literal translation of the name "Louis" (siva+ska, "famous warrior").
Ni'nis = I go
nishur = behind/backwards
rah = home
maks = and
bahukormaga'a = ba + hukormaga + 'a = to get + sphere + one who does = one who gets the sphere = catcher / catching. Catching in this case, because of the next word -
gararo = fancy
Ni'nis nischur rah maks bahukormaga'a gararo = "I go behind home (plate) and (do some) fancy catching"

aiy'hrajhak'ha = aiy'hrajhak + 'ha = tomorrow + to be = "Tomorrow is"
dohukormaga = do + hukormaga = to fly/throw + sphere = "to throw a sphere" = pitching.
du = general all-purpose locative preposition. In this particular case, you go to the next words for context; du in this case is being used for "on".
ni'ahn = my team/my group.
maks = and
dak'a'graga = dak + 'a + graga = stroke + one who does + heavy = "a heavy one that strokes" = heavy hitter. (i.e. a batter)
jaq = to come
aiy'hrajhak'ha dohukormaga du ni'ahn maks dak'a'graga jaq = "Tomorrow is pitching on my team and a heavy hitter comes (up)."

Eshma = now/modern/this time
dak'a'graga'dakinhukormaga = dak'a'graga + dak + -in + hukormaga = heavy hitter (as before) + (strike + diminuative) + sphere = "the heavy hitter bunts the ball"
Eshma dak'a'graga'dakinhukormaga = "Now the heavy hitter bunts the ball".

Ja'lesh = when
gar'dakinhukormaga = gar + dakinhukormaga = general third-person prefix (in this case, "he")+ "bunts the ball"
nai = I/me
bahukormaga'aki = bahukormaga'a + ki = catcher + good = "a good catcher"
ni'h'asdokil = ni' + h'as + do + kil = I/me + will/shall + throw/fly + man (work with me here) = "I will throw the guy"
talan = general opposite all-purpose locative preposition. In this case, Costello is trying to throw the guy out.
du = general all-purpose locative preposition. In this case, it is supposed to mean "at".
lanbraj ar = lan + braj + ar = place + safe + first = first base.
Ja'lesh gar'dakinhukormaga, nai, bahukormaga'aki, ni'h'asdokil talan du lanbraj ar. = "When he bunts the ball, me, a good catcher, I will throw the guy out at first base."

Konis = reason / motive / so
ni'bhahukormaga = ni'bha + hukormaga = I get + sphere = "I get the ball"
maks = and
dogar = do + gar = throw/fly + third-person pronoun (the ball, so "it") = "throw it"
du = general all-purpose locative preposition. In this case, it is supposed to mean "to".
ja'lhra? = who?
Konis, ni'bhahukormaga maks dogar du ja'lhra? = "So, I get (i.e. I pick up) the ball and throw it to who?

To which of course Abbott's response is Eshma mas'hahu ar ri'lek he = "Now that is the first thing you've said right".
Eshma = now/ modern /this time
mas'hahu ar = (mas'ha) + (hu ar) = that + to be + thing + first = "That is the first thing" - remember, numbers are always kept seperate; same goes for ordinals.
ri'lek = ri + le + -k = You + say + past tense marker = "You said"
he = correct / true

Those may be too specific of responses but hopefully it clarifies the way I'm doing things just a little bit

Also the grammar: SVO-structure? Or if not, what and when? In German we use SVO in normal sentences, but in relative clauses we use SOV. Latin mostly uses SOV but permits SVO in some cases IIRC. IIRC Japanese uses SOV (Yoda-speak if you do it in English), but I'm not sure...
I've been using English sentence structure (SVO) up to this point, though that's largely because I've been working in translating materials that were originally in English. There are examples of SOV in the Kilrathi and even one or two of OVS (Klingon-style); I chalk those up to being "earlier versions of the language" or "examples of other dialects".

Side note: I fear I don't get the structure of your posts sometimes, so pardon me if I ask for stuff you already explained. It seems I have to read them a few times to really understand them.
That's alright; a lot of the early posts on this thread were written as an attempt to stay awake from a period between 2-7 AM; they lack a certain sense of coherency as a result.
Also you're nar Okie, they're supposed to be weird, aren't they? ;) :D
And that's your new task: Translate "Okie from Muskogee" into Kilrathi!
Naw, Okie's ain't weird; we likes to talk the good English...

B'hra'hra aq Brajakh Talanakin'hra = "Okie from Muskogee"

B'hra'hra = b' + hra + hra = (red + people) + people = "Oklahoma person" (Oklahoma being from the Choctaw okla and humma meaning "red people")
= from
brajakh = fortress / community
can't find a translation for "Muskogee" other than "a tribe of the Creek nation", so we'll go with Talanakin'hra = talanak + -in + 'hra = (river + diminutive) + people = "Creek people"
and thus brajakh Talanakin'hra = "Community of the Creek People";

Muskogee is the Creek tribal capital...might need to be brajakhthrak instead.
Actually that sounds pretty awesome! :D
Maybe I'll record that old Merle Haggard song with lyrics in Kilrathi... Just hard to make it rhymes I guess... :)
Yeah, when it comes to music written in rhyme, you can forget about it rhyming after the translation.

Vork anruni du lanvorkma'ga thadyaleki, K'dyapa = "Gump sat alone on a bench in the park."
"Ni'hus Irgama'ga", gar'h'askle = "'My name is Forrest', he casually remarked."

...typo there, it should be ni'hus'ha = "my name is". Eh. I have to sleep occasionally.

"Okie from Muskogee", huh? Okay...

EDIT: Whoa! I have to come up with words for cannabis and LSD?!?!
No problem...but I must hang my head in shame that A) I do indeed live in Oklahoma and b) I've never heard this whole song before.

If I mentioned I was born in Kansas, would that matter?

Maybe I should do the B.C. Clark jingle while I'm at it...
Last edited:
And somewhere, Prince Thrakhath is scratching his head, thinking "Ja'lhu vrax?!?!"

"B'hra'hra aq Brajakh Talanakin'hra"
Merle Haggard Terran'hra

♫ Ek'orkjiva irtakharakh du Brajakh Talanakin'hra; ♫
♫ Ek'bhava ek'nislani du lerkaiyiv; ♫
♫ Ek'ji va ek'wur'korasiv du Qith'rak Ar; ♫
♫ Ek'gathkivuhe maks k'dymga'qith'ha. ♫

♫ Ni'ha chodyapakigaga'ha B'hra'hra aq Brajakh Talanakin'hra, ♫
♫ Lan ja'lan ro'hra'i h'ingathki. ♫
♫ Ek'do Skabakchur eshma du dailerag'nith, ♫
♫ Maks knav'knavekarh'ha eshma dawalgargthrak'ga. ♫

♫ Ek'davad'aiyk'toth aq vrash; ♫
♫ Ek'gathki drade'i maks h'in'halvrash uniga k'eshma; ♫
♫ Ek'gathav ek'yan jaq ma'gamaksk'vargs, ♫
♫ Takh irgahak'hra'i du Brajakh Thak'dymga'qiths Kutgaga'hra'a. ♫

♫ Maks ni'ha chodyapakigaga'ha B'hra'hra aq Brajakh Talanakin'hra, ♫
♫ Lan ja'lan ro'hra'i h'ingathki. ♫
♫ Ek'do Skabakchur eshma du dailerag'nith, ♫
♫ Maks knav'knavekarh'ha eshma dawalgargthrak'ga. ♫

♫ Hargpakgachorga'hadiharg eshma ta hargpakkils; ♫
♫ HukorsinmakshargpakinAknis h'asav'ha aiy. ♫
♫ Hukormagapak'ha eshma huk'vargthrak du thadaithrak, ♫
♫ Maks gari'lanma'rakh eshma daikthrakahr. ♫

♫ Ek'do Skabakchur eshma du dailerag'nith, ♫
♫ Du Brajakh Talanakin'hra, B'hra, B.E.T. ♫

Much as I wanted to give Roy Harris co-credit for the song, I couldn't find any other information about him other than the fact that he passed away about three years back.

Definitely does NOT fit the cadence of the original. New Word Count: 4
LOL, sorry, I somehow took it for granted that everyone in the USA and definitely everyone in Oklahoma knows that song. It's one of the most famous country songs ever and is also featured in several movies, like Convoy or Platoon for example.

Very cool translation as well. I have to see if it is somehow possible to sing it.... I think people who listen to it would probably have a good laugh.
LOL, sorry, I somehow took it for granted that everyone in the USA and definitely everyone in Oklahoma knows that song. It's one of the most famous country songs ever and is also featured in several movies, like Convoy or Platoon for example.

Very cool translation as well. I have to see if it is somehow possible to sing it.... I think people who listen to it would probably have a good laugh.

EDIT: Also I think it was Roy Edward Burris who co-wrote the song, he is (or was) Merle Haggard's drummer.
EDIT2: Forum hiccup, sorry for the double post.
I have no clue what song it is, but then again I could count the number of Country songs that I know on the fingers of one hand.
Ok, I'm trying to translate some stuff now as well (just starting).
What about "Now, I am become Death, the destroyer of worlds"?

For me it is something along the lines of:
"Ni'h'ki'ha Hath, Ralrah"
I assume the Kilrathi would make one word of "destroyer of worlds" (Ral for destroyer and rah for world if I read you correctly), like in German "Weltenzerstörer" would be as allowed as "Zerstörer der Welten"

I struggled with the word "now". We have a few phrases where it appears, but it seems to be some kind of particle-thingie.
Do we have other time words? Like "yesterday", "tomorrow" and so on?
Ni'h'asdyaka eshma!! = Now I shall have blood!
Ri'h'asgu eshma!! = Now you will die

I think it works like this:
Subject'h'Verb means I'm doing something now. So here I wrote "I+now_particle+being Death, Destroyerworld".

I made world singular for now. How do plurals work? And is there something to distinguish between
- destroyer of worlds
- destroyer for worlds
- world of destroyers
and other combinations? So basically prepositions. As you can tell I'm still a bit lost.
I should probably have posted this a tad sooner. It's incomplete, but not by very much; probably would be useful in answering most of your questions.

Your translation is pretty close to being correct as is:
Now = eshma
I am = ni'ha
become = jaq
death - You know how they say that the more important a concept is to a people, the more words they have for it? I've got three words for death in Kilrathi, ath, hath and gu, and their usage is subtle but distinct. Hath is the word for death when whatever died is subsequently eaten as food. Gu is when whatever has died is simply dead. Ath is the indeterminate case. I'll admit that I'm not up on the Bhagavad Gita, but I imagine that its not talking about eating the planet afterwards - so the correct term in this case is gu.
the destroyer of worlds = (destroyer + world + plural) = ral'rahi. Ever so close.
"Now I am become death, the destroyer of worlds "= "Ni'ha jaqgu eshma, ral'rahi".

Ni'h'ki'ha Hath, Ralrah is pretty close:
Ni = I / me / mine
h' = orange (color)
ki = good / goodness / well
'ha = to be
Hath = death (for food)
Ralrah = world of the destroyer.
Ni'h'ki'ha Hath, Ralrah = "My orange goodness is death for food, world of the destroyer". :D:p:eek:

I haven't written the section on adverbials yet - eshma is one of those that is special, a particle as you've mentioned. These always appear after the verb they modify and seperate from it. Since you "became" death "now", the now comes after the verb "become" in this case. The list of special adverbials only made it up onto the wiki page on Friday, and I'm missing two of them (the ones for "sometimes" and "soon"). The ones I do have are:
anruni = only / merely / just
eshma = now
vesh = never
balanga = frequent / often
eshga = always
jha = then
k'gris = perhaps / maybe

Plurals - add an "i" to the end. Context distinguishes the "i" suffix as either plural or possessive - in this case since we've already got a possessive going on, the "i" as possessive would be redundant and so its presence automatically indicates plurality.
destroyer of worlds = ral'rahi (this is a possessive form, so ral'rahi can also be translated as "the world's destroyer")
destroyer for worlds = ral ta rahi
world of destroyers = rah'rali
worlds of destroyers = rahi'rali
= "of" only appears when its not implicit. You could just as easily say destroyer of worlds = ral erg rahi. This would be a correct way of saying it; I imagine with the rules I've got going on that it would either come off as formal or presumptuous.

world through destroyers = rah du rali
world by destroyers = rah ra rali

world by doing must be must = ♫ rah ra'a ha'ha ha ♫ ....oh, sorry. Had a Lady Gaga moment there. :)
Wow, I almost laughed my ass off there. :D
I still have a lot to learn I guess.

Very handy list! I'll go on translating some more in the next few days.
I'm glad that you're asking questions about the language - it's helping me find things that I need to clarify and emphasize. For example, I had over the weekend considered combining the section on modifiers into the sections on verbs and nouns; after your question this morning, I now think that's a bad idea. Also I definitely need to clarify some of the rules of possession - kilrah I took to be kil + rah = man (work with me here) / people (formal) + world/home, thus "home of the people" or "world of the people", but that's a violation of the possession rules as I've written them. I suppose it could just be a compound noun ("people home") with come clipping going on (so that it stems from "people's home"; it still violates the possession rules), or perhaps it's just "a loan word from an earlier dialect". Ralrah could be the same way, a compound noun - "destroyer world", "destroyer's world" if it's got clipping going on, or "world destroyer" if rah is being used as an adjective. It definitely isn't "world of the destroyer" with the possession rules as I've written them; that'd be rah'ral. Ralrah would most likely be "world destroyer".

If I myself am somewhat confused about this, I can't blame you for also being confused, and I need to work out a method of clarification.
Hmmm.... let's see if we can find a rule that fits.
I think it is most likely a compound noun with clipping and also an old word. As in most cases I take the German example. Here's how the word for our country developed (I'll leave the first few centuries out, where it was called completely different): "Der Deutschen Land" (The Germans' land) became "Deutschenland" (Germansland) and that became "Deutschland" (so now it sounds like the adjective "deutsch" combined with land).

Often either syllables in the bginning or the end get lost over teh centuries, and also quite often multiple same vowels following each other shortly get lost. Let's look at the English word for Spain: Espana loses the "E" and the "a" but somehow gets an additional "i". In German we say "Spanien", which is even more different, but the core part stays intelligible.

And one more example:
In my town there is a part called "Haidach" which looks like "shark roof". Actually it was Heudach (hay roof, the roof part because it is a hill) until some point during the 19th century. It was a grassy hill where the farmers had their hay barns. But since people pronounce "Heu" like "high" (which is written Hai) in this region it somehow bacame the written form.

Maybe something similar happened to Kilrah. Maybe it was called Kili'irah (the first "i" being the plural of "kil" and the second one the possesive form. Not sure about the apostroph but it feels right. Feel free to ignore it though). So it meant the peoples' world. But it was shortened to make it easier to pronounce. Or maybe a vowel used to be different. Try playing around with the vowels and look what it could have meant.

That's all I have in mind for now. But I'll play around myself with the words, maybe I'll find something as well.

EDIT: Maybe it was Ka'ilrah at some point? Meaning spirit+creature that is or does something+world. So something like "world of the creatures with spirit" or "world of the creatures of the blood" (the noble creatures). Dunno. Just making wild guesses. :D
Last edited:
I'll admit that I'm not up on the Bhagavad Gita, but I imagine that its not talking about eating the planet afterwards - so the correct term in this case is gu.
the destroyer of worlds = (destroyer + world + plural) = ral'rahi. Ever so close.
"Now I am become death, the destroyer of worlds "= "Ni'ha jaqgu eshma, ral'rahi".
It does depend a lot on whether Shiva (the aforementioned Destroyer) is being depicted as "consuming" that which he destroys (e.g. as a fire consumes that which is burnt), or simply annihilating it.
If I am not mistaken Shiva doesn't eat the world, he stomps with his foot or something, destroying the universe and creating another one (sounds like the Big Bang actually :) ).
Ok, so now I went insane and started translating the Gettysburg Address by the 16th President of the USA (and vampire hunter IIRC), Abraham Lincoln.

I will do this in parts in order to be able to talk about it better. Here's the first sentence. I'm pretty sure the tenses are completely messed up, but it took me two hours so I'll post it anyway:

“Fourscore and seven years ago our fathers brought forth on this continent a new nation, conceived in liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal."

H'pduok kesthai ek'lakh da narthrak kir ko lanma rahdukutav, eshchurda da k'dymga'qithhu, maks korakh'ha jaqwinhalda'ik, ga kili da'ha'ha takh.

Actually it is intended to say: (7 + 10 x 8) (year+plural) (our-ancestors) create nation new on this (continent, literally world-apart), (before-create, meaning to conceive) in (free+'thing' Are there no means to nominalize verbs by using a particle or something?), and (to be duty, meaning dedicated to. Do we need a preposition here?) principle, all (men - I used kili, meaning persons) (created+passive+are) equal (how do you make an adverb out of a verb, or do Kilrathi just use the adjectives as adverbs, like it is done often in some languages).

Whatever, discuss!
First of all - I'm glad you guys are up on your Bhagavad Gita. I had assumed the correct term was gu, but as I didn't know for sure, I probably "risked death" by not using ath instead. Good thing neither of you are Kilrathi...

Okay. Gettysburg Address - here we have the advantage of a translation already done (the Lethrak Brajakh Linap post on page 2 of this thread). There, the first two lines read:

Kestha'i okkodeokh'p nisk aq esh ja'lesh ek'nhari gath matha narthrak'kir / narthrak mas vujaq si mas ga kil'k'dymga'qith, narthrak'gathsi mas ga kil'takh.

This was one I translated from the Basic English translation, which reads:
Seven and eighty years have gone by from the day when our fathers gave to this land a new nation -- a nation which came to birth in the thought that all men are free, a nation given up to the idea that all men are equal.

Let's go over my translation real quick - it has a number of errors:
kestha'i = years. I have a rule that states that A and I are the only two vowels that can appear next to one another without a glottal stop; the glottal stop would be applied if a case were to come up where the meaning of the word could be confused otherwise. I don't have any word associated with kesthai, hence there's no chance of confusion, so I don't know why I added the apostrophe in this case - this is a case where my translation is wrong. Zu'kara time.
okkodeokh'p = 127, 87 in base-8. Looking through that section again this morning, it seems this is patently wrong - it should be h'pdeok'okko. I have it backwards.
nisk = nis + -'k = to go + past tense marker = gone. This violates the rules on verbs in the passive voice, where I should've also added dya = "to have" to the end of kesthai.
aq = from
esh = time
ja'lesh = when
ek'nhari = our fathers. I like your translation of ek'lakh = "our ancestors" better, quite frankly.
gath = to give (again, this should be the past tense gathk)
matha = ma + tha = this land
narthrak'kir = new nation / government. I've since stated that kir should be added as a prefix (thus kirnarthrak is the correct form now.)
narthrak = nation / government (from nar + thrak, literally "great clan")
mas = that
vujaq = birth. This one's not in the correct tense, and the passive voice has one again been ignored.
si = idea
mas = that
ga = all
kil'k'dymga'qith = kil + k'- + dymga'qith = man + lack of + chain = "free man". Passive voice again.
narthrak'gathsi = narthrak + gath + si = government + to give + idea
mas = that
ga = all
kil'takh = kil + takh = man + equal = "equal man". Passive voice again.

So so much for using my translation to help the discussion. Just shows that I need to go back and get it right next time. And maybe use the original.

So let's see what you've got there:
H'pduok = "Seven and ten-eights". I hadn't really intended to have du = ten as a modifier available for ok (think of it as zwölf - in English you wouldn't say "twelve tens", you'd say "one hundred twenty").
kesthai = years
ek'lakh = our ancestors
da = to make. Here you need the -'k past tense marker for da'k = created. The glottal stop is necessary to avoid confusion with dak = stroke / blow.
narthrak kir = government + young / youth / new. You and I made the same mistake here, I just added a glottal stop. Kirnarthrak.
ko = profession / job / work / billet / on / operable. This one should've been du = in / across / again / at / on / up / through / to / towards / dorsal. Ko = on would be used to denote something that is operating, as in hu'ha ko = "The thing is on" / "The thing is working". This usage is clarified in the E-to-K lexicon table but not in the K-to-E, so I'll correct that too.
lanma rahdukutav = here / there / present + (world / home + apart) = "here apart world". A better translation might've been mahukutav'rah = "this piece of world", or you could go even more generic like I did and just say matha = "this land".
eshchurda = eshchur + da = past / before + to make / to create / building / hall = "before-create". Okay, that's not a bad translation, though it may not properly capture the spirit of what Lincoln was saying here. "Conceive" is not in the lexicon; when that happens my procedure is to first look it up on Simple English Wiktionary and go on to English Wiktionary if I can't come up with a good translation. There are three translations for conceive at Simple Wiktionary plus a synonym - I follow the chain of definitions and synonyms that best fits what I want to say. In this case, "conceive" may also mean "imagine", "visualize", "envision" or "dream". "Envision" has the simplest single definition - "to see it in your mind". I might therefore go with "see-inside-mind" = aiy + duda + pa = aiydudapa.
da = to make / to create / building / hall. Nope; du again. This time du = in / across / again / at / on / up / through / to / towards / dorsal
k'dymga'qithhu = k'dymga'qith + hu = free / unchained + thing. Some words may be utilized as both verb and noun, and k'dymga'qith is one such word; there is no nominalized form. By itself, it can mean "free" or "freedom".
maks = and / plus / also
korakh'ha = "duty is" / "duty be". I don't have a word for "dedicate" in the lexicon, per se - the best definition here is "to commit to a special action or thought", with commit having the meaning of "to pledge or bind", pledge meaning "swear" or "vow", for which there is a translation. So "swear" would work here - kir'kha. Make it past tense for "sworn" - kir'khak.
= principle / dogma. This one works; it's more specific than si = idea / thought.
ga kili da'ha'ha takh = all / every / much / quite / very + men + (to make + to be + to be) equal. For what you want to say, it should be ga kili'ha da'ktakh. Add a seperate mas = "that" up front and you have mas ga kili'ha da'ktakh = "that all men are created equal."

So we're left with:
Kesthai h'pdeok'okko du eshchur, ek'lakh'da'k kirnarthrak du matha, aiydudapak du k'dymga'qith maks kir'khak du jaqwinhalda'ik mas ga kili'ha da'ktakh.
Which translates as:
87 years in the past, our ancestors created a new government on this land, envisioned in freedom and sworn to the principle that all men are created equal.

Prepositions - basic ones are
du = in / across / again / at / on (locative) / up / through / to / towards / dorsal
erg = of (when it must be explicit) / about / among / between
gara = greater than / better than / above / over
inra = less than / below / deep / lower / under
talan = away / ventral / down / out (talan is intended to be used as the opposite of du)
ra = than / with (and rav = without)
ras = by
ta = for / because
When in doubt, try du or talan first.
Last edited by a moderator: