tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sun May 19 09:44:09 1996
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: KLBC:Name that Song
- From: [email protected] (Alan Anderson)
- Subject: Re: KLBC:Name that Song
- Date: Sun, 19 May 1996 11:47:21 -0500
Ford writes:
>Actually, I originally intended to {ghach}ise the verb (what a disgusting way
>to say that! :)) to make {mughghachmeywIj}.
The usual term is "nominalize", meaning "make into a noun." But remember
that putting {-ghach} on a verb with no intervening verb suffixes isn't a
very pretty thing. It can certainly be understood, but it calls a lot of
attention to the word itself, rather than to its meaning. Okrand says it
is like the pseudo-words "givation" or "honoredness" (HolQeD 3:3).
We can usually put an aspect suffix ({-taH}, {-ta'}, {-lI'}, {-pu'}) on a
verb in order to use {-ghach} to get a "gerund" form of the verb, but the
result usually refers to the *action*, not the *result*. I don't know if
I would understand {mughta'ghach} as the result of translating something,
or as the (finished) event of doing the translation. It is almost always
better to avoid nominalizing verbs, and use them as verbs (the way Okrand
intended!).
-- ghunchu'wI' batlh Suvchugh vaj batlh SovchoH vaj