tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Aug 16 05:46:11 1994

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: Verb -> Noun Query

According to Niall Hosking:
> 
> 
> Okay, I know that we're 'not allowed' to turn verbs to nouns (or vice
> versa) that don't appear in TKD (no matter how that would expand the
> vocabulary) but couldn't we get around that partially by using {-ghach}
> on a verb, turning it into a noun?  Or is this also not allowable with a
> *strict* interpretation of TKD 4.2.9 (Addendum)?
> -- 
> {qSeroHS vayn}

This is one of the more controversial areas of Klingon grammar
simply because Okrand was so vague about it. Glen Proechel
wrote an article in HolQeD which surprised more than a few of
us, putting forth a strong argument against the use of {-ghach}
on verbs that do not have suffixes (particularly {-Ha'}) that
make up a core part of the verb's meaning. He also presented a
very WEAK argument in favor of using verbs as nouns whenever
you want to.

A number of significant Klingonists, including our most
respected Krankor, the longest standing Grammarian, do not buy
the argument against the use of {-ghach} on unsuffixed verbs.
Others, such as myself think that the wording in TKD is shakey
enough that, lacking any examples in canon, we just shy away
from using {-ghach} unless we absolutely must. Still others
think it is okay to use {-taHghach} in order to satisfy the
implied need of a verbal suffix. Nobody in any of these three
groups likes the conclusions that the other two groups have
settled on.

We need for Okrand to come out and clarify this. I personally
would be happy if Krankor is right. It would make things a LOT
simpler.  Meanwhile, it also would weaken the Klingon focus on
verbs and allow bad Klingonists to remap English words to
Klingon words to write lots of noun-centric Klinglish, so I
will also be happy if Okrand pronounces that use of {-ghach} is
as limited as Proechel interprets.

And almost unanimously, we agree on this list that the idea of
using verbs as nouns whenever you like is horrible. It makes it
easy to write an English sentence using Klingon words.  It
makes it very difficult to read a Klingon sentence. We are less
interested in making it easy to translate from English to
Klingon than we are in making Klingon a language capable of
conveying meaningful thoughts.

And so, I avoid most nominalization of verbs altogether,
recasting like crazy to avoid the issue whenever possible.
Krankor uses {-ghach} on bare verbs to make them nouns, BUT
EVEN HE DOES NOT DO IT VERY OFTEN. He sees it as a tool for
expression that has its special place in the language,
resulting in the BEST, and not necessarily the EASIEST of
translations. Of all those who use this, I think he is most
graceful. None of us particularly want {-ghach} to become the
most commonly used suffix in the language, which it easily
could become, if the beginners who want to use it freely get
their way.

In my defense, with the new trading cards and throughout canon,
Okrand has not yet chosen to give an example of {-ghach}, so if
you choose to use it, this suggests that you should probably
seek at least once to cast your sentence without it. The
example I repeat so often is, instead of saying, "Give me your
answer," just say, "Answer me."

Verbs work best in Klingon as verbs. While this is "foreign"
for an English speaker to understand, well, that's probably the
whole reason Okrand did it that way. He worked hard to make
this a foreign language. Waaay foreign.

charghwI'

Back to archive top level