tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri Apr 19 08:27:03 1996
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: Nouns as Verbs
- From: "Mark E. Shoulson" <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: Nouns as Verbs
- Date: Fri, 19 Apr 1996 11:27:00 -0400 (EDT)
- In-reply-to: <[email protected]> (message fromConsulat General de Pologne on Thu, 18 Apr 1996 15:20:58 -0700)
>Date: Thu, 18 Apr 1996 15:20:58 -0700
>From: Consulat General de Pologne <#[email protected]>
>"Mark E. Shoulson" <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >> 3) Is it possible to use nouns as verbs. I know there are few
>> >> nouns that are also verbs, but there is a (small indeed) number
>> >> of them which are not verbs.
>>
>> I doubt it. Is it meaningful to have such a thing? What would a verb
>> "book" mean (and don't tell me to reserve; that's an English idiom)? Or
>> "to heart" or "to history" or "to shuttlecraft"? There's no evidence of
>> any generic verbalizing construction that I know of. There are ways to use
>> the nouns, though...
>> ~mark
>In Sanskrit there is a whole class of verbs - class X (ten) ending with {-aya-}
>which are almost exclisively denominativa (noun-originating) or causativa.
>In Polish we have a similar facility of forming verbs of nouns with the
>ending {-owa-}
Is the tenth ga.na really denominative? I thought the cvi pratyaya was
used more for that. I'm not sure what it has to do with Klingon, though.
On a scale of complexity, if Klingon is a 3, English is probably an 8 and
Sanskrit is a 15. Sanskrit plays *extremely* fast and loose with its noun
and verb derivations and meanings, and has enough different forms to make
English look like babytalk. To try to apply it to Klingon (which is made
to look like babytalk by English) is like plugging a battery-powered toy
into a high-voltage line.
Bear in mind, too, that Sanskrit was developed very highly as a poetic
language (more so than a vernacular, even), and poets were encouraged to
use more and more obscure forms to show off their erudition. Also, even if
Sanskrit weren't so poetic in its use at the time, the Sanskrit which has
reached us is mostly from epic poems and stories. I've never studied
Polish so I can't say much about it, but I'd be caution about drawing too
many conclusions from it to Klingon either.
Besides, we have enough trouble working out what -ghach is from among its
possible meanings; a noun-to-verb construction would be even vaguer (as
evidenced by your own examples).
>Of course I understand, that not all denominativa make sens. But surely
>many of them do.
>Taking TKD let me choose by hazard some of the nouns that could function
>as verbs too:
>bep: agony - to agonize
>biQ: water - to water (to water a flower = to make use water; to water a ship
> = to make take place on water; to water a log = to function as water =
> = a river waters logs down = lets them float with water down; all
> three meaning attested in Polish).
>ghoch: destination - to serve as destination
ghoch is also a verb: to track down.
>yach: pet - to be a pet
yach is a verb: Saj is a noun "pet"
>neHmaH: neutral zone - to function as neutral zone
>tay: ritual - to function as a ritual(stat.) /to make as a ritual (trans.)
verb: tay: be civilized.
>veng: city - to function as a city/to use as a city/ to make use of a city only
> (to stay all the time in a city).
I guess, then, that the best answer to your question of "do we have
something that does this in Klingon?" is "No." I've never seen any
evidence of such a thing. Maybe there will be one someday, though I doubt
it. But I could be wrong.
~mark