# I need terminology for a werecreature that infects a human



## RayO_ElGatubelo (Sep 8, 2011)

Now, as you guys might know... my characters live in an universe of werecreatures and humans. Now, as of now, I've been using the word "thrall" (I've seen it in some werewolf fiction) to establish a relationship between a therianthrope and the person he infected with the curse. However, while I have terminology for the cursed person, I don't have one for the one who put the curse on him or her.

For example, let's take one of my characters as an example. Ray bit Paola and turned her into a werejaguar like him. If Paola is Ray's thrall, what relationship does Ray have to Paola? I need a word for that. I welcome your suggestions


----------



## Fenrari (Sep 8, 2011)

The word Master comes to mind. As do any synonyms of the like.


----------



## RayO_ElGatubelo (Sep 8, 2011)

Fenrari said:


> The word Master comes to mind. As do any synonyms of the like.



Master sounds a bit S&M for my liking.


----------



## Tiger In A Tie (Sep 8, 2011)

Her Lord? Power? Cursed? Giver?


----------



## Gavrill (Sep 8, 2011)

I call them Sire/sires in my own stories, and the humans they change "fledglings". I probably stole it from somewhere, but yeah. Basically anything that turns someone else is called that person's Sire.


----------



## RayO_ElGatubelo (Sep 8, 2011)

Gavrill said:


> I call them Sire/sires in my own stories, and the humans they change "fledglings". I probably stole it from somewhere, but yeah. Basically anything that turns someone else is called that person's Sire.



Sire... I like that. Thanks.


----------



## CAThulu (Sep 8, 2011)

I like Sire.  If the were is also the leader of the pack 'Alpha' would also be a good term to use


----------



## Tiger In A Tie (Sep 8, 2011)

Oooh, I'd go with Sire. Sounds regal.


----------



## Cyanide_tiger (Sep 8, 2011)

RayO_ElGatubelo said:


> Sire... I like that. Thanks.



While "sire" fits the need for the word you're looking for, it generally has a stronger connotation toward vampires than werecreatures. I would suggest going with something that sounds a bit more tribal or simple, since the image of a primative beast is what generally comes to mind for a reader when a werecreature is mentioned. 

Although, depending on how you write the characters and the general society of werecreatures, different terminology could have an easier fit. Alpha, maker, father/mother, matriarch/patriarch, or something along those lines may work a little better.

Edit: Lifegiver or awakener could work as well, depending on the feel and mood of the setting the view of this relationship you want the reader to have.


----------



## RayO_ElGatubelo (Sep 9, 2011)

Cyanide_tiger said:


> While "sire" fits the need for the word you're looking for, it generally has a stronger connotation toward vampires than werecreatures. I would suggest going with something that sounds a bit more tribal or simple, since the image of a primative beast is what generally comes to mind for a reader when a werecreature is mentioned.



Actually, "sire" does fit werecreatures well. "Sire" is a term used by dog breeders to talk about a puppy's father. By that rationale, the female would be "dam." My character Zelda would be an example of a dam.


----------



## Cyanide_tiger (Sep 9, 2011)

RayO_ElGatubelo said:


> Actually, "sire" does fit werecreatures well. "Sire" is a term used by dog breeders to talk about a puppy's father. By that rationale, the female would be "dam." My character Zelda would be an example of a dam.



Doesn't matter that it's a term used by dog breeders really, my point is more toward what an average reader will associate the words with, and the term "sire" is more associated with vampires than it is werewolves. The average reader doesn't breed dogs, so they're not gonna know it's a dog breeder term. If you want to use the term though, use it all you damn well please, just don't sit here and spit in my face when I offer you the advice you were asking for.


----------



## Gavrill (Sep 9, 2011)

Then you could, uh, _explain _â€‹that to a reader? :1


Seriously Cyanide, there was nothing offensive about that post. Chill.


----------



## Cyanide_tiger (Sep 10, 2011)

Gavrill said:


> Then you could, uh, _explain _â€‹that to a reader? :1
> 
> 
> Seriously Cyanide, there was nothing offensive about that post. Chill.



Unless the story involves dog breeders, why bother using a term that requires explaining at all? That's just clutter that nudges the reader toward losing interest in the story. He hasn't said whether it does or not, but since he isn't using these dog breeder terms in the first place(hence why the thread was posted at all), it would be a safe assumption that it doesn't.

As a writer, you need to choose your terms carefully according to how much explanation is required and what the average reader's automatic association with that term may be. As I stated before, using jargon that requires explanation detracts from the story and has a chance of confusing the reader, which is a bad thing(which I can elaborate on a bit more if you desire). The term that is chosen also needs to be selected because of the imediate connotation it carried with it. For example: Using the term "sire." "Sire" is generally associated with vampires, vampires are usually evil, therefore "sire" carries a generally negative connotation which would subtly imply a bad relationship between the two characters. If that's the implication that the writer wants the reader to get, then great - use it if it sounds right. However, if the writer wants the reader to have a more positive or neutral opinion of the relationship, then a different term would be better suited for the task. 

Simply at noting above that the one having been changed by another is called a "thrall," that makes me automatically assume that the ones who create the thralls are generally manipulative, enjoy having power over others, and probably enjoy the degradation of their underlings to some degree. I could be completely wrong about that, but that is the connotation the term carries with it.


----------



## Gavrill (Sep 10, 2011)

I didn't hear any mention of vampires in the OP, or what kind of relationships the vampires would have with werewolves, or whether or not the werewolves would be the classic monstrous beasts. In the end it's up for RayO to decide, and it's not good to go around making assumptions. 

This is the part that bothered me:


> If you want to use the term though, use it all you damn well please, just don't sit here and spit in my face when I offer you the advice you were asking for.



Of course no one's going to take your advice if you're a dick about it. It's possible to say "I disagree" without being volatile.


----------



## Cyanide_tiger (Sep 10, 2011)

Gavrill said:


> I didn't hear any mention of vampires in the OP, or what kind of relationships the vampires would have with werewolves, or whether or not the werewolves would be the classic monstrous beasts. In the end it's up for RayO to decide, and it's not good to go around making assumptions.
> 
> This is the part that bothered me:
> 
> ...



Whether vampires are actually involved in the story is irrelevent. My point is that readers will make assumptions and connections subconsciously whether you like it or not, and that will effect their view of the characters, and any writer that puts pen to paper should be fully aware of that. The more aware of this you are, the more you can steer a reader toward thinking the way you want them to think.

I'm not entirely sure how to make myself much clearer at this point without repeating myself more than I already may have.

It is indeed fully his choice on what term he uses, all I'm doing is providing information so that he can make the best choice for his story. Whether I came off as a dick or not doesn't make my points here any less valid.


----------



## Gavrill (Sep 10, 2011)

I honestly do not care about your ~points~.

I said to chill. Whether you want to keep riding the high horse here is up to you, but I'm not arguing about something you seem to feel way too passionately about. And yes, being a dick DOES make your opinion less valid. Ad hominem and all.

I'm not saying your advice is wrong. I just get tired of the dick-for-no-reason thing.


----------



## Dj_whoohoo (Sep 10, 2011)

Why not just make up your own words and make a glossary in the first couple of pages right after the table of contents this way it's probably easier because you won't have to think of any words just make them up as you go or you can go with sire


----------



## Cyanide_tiger (Sep 10, 2011)

Gavrill said:


> I honestly do not care about your ~points~.
> 
> I said to chill. Whether you want to keep riding the high horse here is up to you, but I'm not arguing about something you seem to feel way too passionately about. And yes, being a dick DOES make your opinion less valid. Ad hominem and all.
> 
> I'm not saying your advice is wrong. I just get tired of the dick-for-no-reason thing.



You've been attempting to point out fallacies in nearly everything I've said here, and I've corrected you every step of the way, now you say you don't care about the points that I've been making? Yeah, okay. Nice backpedal attempt there.

Also, you're sitting here saying that my attitude makes my points less valid and then in the same breath you're saying that I'm not wrong. So which is it? I'm not disputing that I came off as a dick when the OP appeared a bit ungrateful for the original advice I offered, and the validity of my reaction is debatable(though really not worth arguing over). However, I fail to see how a defensive attitude makes me wrong about anything I said on the subject of what terms you should choose in writing and why. 

There's a difference between how valid a point is and how much someone may listen to it.


----------



## Calemeyr (Sep 10, 2011)

Progenitor, Alpha, Forerunner, Lord, Marquis, Great One, etc... Those could work, as titles.


----------



## Fenrari (Sep 10, 2011)

Thrall is Nordic for Slave... How does that sound any less S/M-y?


----------



## Lunar (Sep 10, 2011)

Dj_whoohoo said:


> Why not just make up your own words and make a glossary in the first couple of pages right after the table of contents this way it's probably easier because you won't have to think of any words just make them up as you go or you can go with sire


I second that.  Very good suggestion.

Jeez o Pete, there's more drama here than 1940's Europe as a high-school-freshman classroom.


----------



## RayO_ElGatubelo (Sep 10, 2011)

Fenrari said:


> Thrall is Nordic for Slave... How does that sound any less S/M-y?



The fact that it's in a foreign language.


----------



## Gavrill (Sep 11, 2011)

Cyanide_tiger said:


> words


okay

Back on topic; if we're going with foreign words...
Hnngh...Vater? German for father? I guess if it was a female doing the turning it could be Mutter?


----------

