(urth) The Katharine maid

Roy C. Lackey rclackey at stic.net
Sat Oct 28 21:30:48 PDT 2006

Tim Walters quoted and wrote:
>> The dictionary citations both of you have given support my reading.
>No, they don't. Nathan Spears' citation ("Two children borne by her
>earlier") is exactly analogous to Wolfe's clause ("the Severian of
>bone and flesh borne by Catherine in a cell..."),

The complete cited sentence was: "Two children borne by her earlier were
already grown." The presence of the verb "were", following "borne", changes
the sentence structure, making the analogy flawed. But it doesn't really
matter. If Wolfe intended "borne by" to mean "given birth by", then it
violates sanctioned usage. If he intended it to mean "carried by" (referring
to a pregnant woman), it doesn't. Either way, as I have previously
indicated, the implication is that Catherine seems to have been pregnant and
in a cell. It follows that Severian was most likely born in a cell, which
means that my theory that he wasn't is probably wrong.


More information about the Urth mailing list