tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sun Sep 08 20:11:20 1996

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: KLBC: jIyajbe'


Speak of the devil... here is an example exactly why you don't answer before
the BG on a grammar question...


At 06:03 PM 8/30/96 -0700, [email protected] wrote:
>At 04:07 AM 30/8/96 -0700, you wrote:
>>What about <ghach>?  I have seen some confusion on when and how this
>>can/should be used.  According to my TKD, it would appear that it can only
>>be used when the verb has a suffix. ie:  <naDHa'ghach> for
>>"discommendation".
>
>You are mistaken here, {-ghach} can be used on noun without suffixes too.


You are mistaken also.  -ghach is a VERB suffix.  I suspect this may have
been a "brain fart", as you correctly quoted that it was a verb suffix
later.  -ghach is a suffix that turns verbs into nouns... but it cannot be
used on a noun (because why would you want to turn a noun into a noun?  It
already IS!)

I think part of your confusion over -wI' and -ghach is what they DO.

Both -wI' and -ghach MUST be used on verbs (-wI' meaning "one who does/thing
which does" here).  Once you tack them onto the verb, the word you have is
no longer a verb... it is a NOUN, even though it has a verb at the root of
it, and possibly multiple verb suffixes.  Look at <naDHa'ghach> for example.
It translates to "discommendation", which is clearly a noun, right?  Well,
-Ha' is a VERB suffix--what is a verb suffix doing on a noun???  Well, it
isn't on a noun... it is on the VERB <naD>, and the -ghach makes the whole
thing a noun.  It might be easier to think of it as:  until you hit that
-wI'/-ghach, you are dealing with a verb, not a noun; the -wI'/-ghach means
"from this point on, this is a NOUN!".

You can even have noun suffixes on one of these nominalized verbs.  For example:

        naDHa'ghachqoqmaj
        "our so-called discommendation"

Please note that there is still that verb suffix in there... the -Ha'... and
that the noun suffixes come after the -ghach.  Using both noun and verb
suffixes, it is theoretically possible to have up to 14 suffixes on a verb!
(9 verb suffix, and 5 noun suffixes)... However, that is not very likely to
happen in everyday speech (wasn't there a contest for this very thing in
_HolQeD_?)


>TKD page 176 4.2.9. "...as nouns, but it is know that verbs ending in
>suffixes (...) can never be nouns. The Type 9 suffix {-ghach}, however, can
>be added to such verbs in order to form nouns." This piece of text doesn't
>have the words "...can only be added to..." in it, thusly my interpretation
>has always been that if a verb had no noun counterpart, that was known, one
>could, only as distinguished noun, highlight it with the Type 9 suffix
>{-ghach}.


You are partially correct here.  This is where those back-issues of _HolQeD_
com in handy.  I think I already quoted part of the artivle realteing to
this in a previous message in this thread, so I will just summarize here:
yes, this is technically grammatical, however, it is a "marked form"... in
other words, you will be understood, but your honour and reputation will
forever be tarnished with the knowledge that you are just a terran
tourist...  {{:)


>>Does this mean that it is equivalent to putting "-tion"
>>in English?  What do I do when I need a noun which is roughly "thing which
>>is", such as when I was working on computer terms and wanted a word for a
>>"program".  I had <ghun> as a verb for "to program", but needed it to be a
>>noun.
>
>I think the word is acceptable, but some may disagree. In this case choose
>the path that you find correct and plausible...


That's about the best way to think of it, yes.


>>According to TKD, and what I've seen here <ghunghach> is illegal.
>
>You must have a different TKD than I do...


Unfortunately, no.  TKD *implies* that this is not a correct usage, and
which it is *technically* correct and understandable, it is the kind of
thing people snicker about behind your back...

I personally consider -ghach a "last ditch" tool--I only use it when I have
absolutely NO other way to say what I want to say... and I cannot re-word my
sentence to use this verb as a VERB.  That is just *my* usage, and may not
reflect the opinions on the list--there are some people who feel that -ghach
is a valid tool, and should be used this way, if you would like.  That's
another DEBATE ALERT for you. {{:)


>Qapla'
>
>beHwI"av



--tQ


---
HoD trI'Qal, tlhIngan wo' Duj lIy So' ra'wI'
Captain T'rkal, Commander IKV Hidden Comet (Klingon speaker and net junkie!)
HaghtaHbogh tlhIngan yIvoqQo'!  toH... qatlh HaghtaH Qanqor HoD???
monlI'bogh tlhInganbe' yIvoqQo'!  SoHvaD monlI' trI'Qal...

Back to archive top level