tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Apr 10 13:24:35 2002

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

• Index by Date
• Index by Thread
• Index by Author

Re: ghorghvaD 'oH?

• From: "David Trimboli" <[email protected]>
• Subject: Re: ghorghvaD 'oH?
• Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2002 13:24:29 -0400
• References: <[email protected]>

From: "Sean M. Burke" <[email protected]>
> At 11:49 2002-04-08 +0000, Agnieszka Solska wrote:
> >>K: ghorghvaD 'oH?
> >>Gloss: When is it for?
> >>Eno/Schmidt: When is it for?
> ><ghorgh> is not a noun and cannot take noun suffixes.
>
> Some things besides prototypical nouns can act like nouns.  Consider
> {nuqDaq}.  {nuq} isn't a prototypical noun, but it takes a noun suffix
> {Daq} just fine.

/nuqDaq/ is a lexicalized word -- it's in the dictionary.  It is probably a
distinct word, not /nuq/ + /Daq/, though that's likely its original
derivation.  /ghorghvaD/ is not in the dictionary, and the known rules would
suggest that it's not allowed.

I go along with the belief that question words don't take noun suffixes.
They're not nouns, even if some of them occasionally stand in for nouns.  I
think such constructions would be UNDERSTOOD, in a wink-wink-nudge-nudge
sort of way.

SuStel
Stardate 2274.4

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: ghorghvaD 'oH?
    • From: Alan Anderson <[email protected]>

• References:
  • ghorghvaD 'oH?
    • From: "Sean M. Burke" <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: to' nech, 004: {ghorghvaD 'oH?}
• Next by Date: Re: to' nech, 001: {Hal latlh yIyu', lI'mo' pagh lI'be'mo'}
• Prev by thread: to' nech, 004: {ghorghvaD 'oH?}
• Next by thread: Re: ghorghvaD 'oH?
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread
  • Author

Back to archive top level