tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri Apr 19 15:12:32 1996
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: Nouns as Verbs
Mark E. Shoulson wrote:
>
> >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
as of 9:00am this morning i have been unsubscribed i
recieved confirmation bout noon so please stop sending
me email i have recieved 40 pieces since i had been
unsubscribed i just do not want anymore
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^