tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri May 23 00:10:01 1997
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Compound Nouns
- From: [email protected]
- Subject: Compound Nouns
- Date: Fri, 23 May 1997 03:09:31 -0400 (EDT)
I have just re-read TKD three times, every word, carefully. I am especially
concerned with the text regarding compound nouns (Sec. 3.2, pp 19-20). The
evidence is that we can form compound nouns by connecting two (or more) nouns
(Sec. 3.2.1); or, we can add {-wI'} to a verb to result in a noun (Sec
3.2.2). There exists further evidence that more complex nouns result from
the connection of simple nouns (Sec. 3.2.3).
However, Sec. 3.2 states that "Complex nouns, on the other hand, are made up
of more than one part." I cannot find any restriction that the parts may not
be parts of speech other than nouns, e.g. verbs.
In HolQeD Vol 3 No 4 Terrence Donnelly writes "I should note... many compound
nouns contain elements that are listed in the lexicon only as verbs...."
"There are also compound nouns that appear to be formed from a noun and a
stative verb." {HeDon} "parallel course" and {bIQtIq} "river"... I believe
that their structure indicates that the verb retains its verbal nature in
these compounds and is the modifier in these cases, unlike the noun-noun
compound... ... {bIQtIq} is to be interpreted "long water," not "the length
of the water." There is even {chuS'ugh} which results from two stative
verbs. "In fact, it was my inability to explain them in the usual terms of a
noun-noun...."
"I believe that a careful study of the existing lexicon and application of
the compounding principles could greatly expand the vocabulary of Klingon,
without violating any of the internal logic of the language."
You all know how I, peHruS, feel about allowing complex (perhaps a better
word here than compound) nouns to come into existence from differing parts of
speech. Therefore, I challenge KLI experts to prove why we have chosen to
compound nouns only from the noun-noun construction. Did I miss something
the founding fathers and mothers wrote when HolQeD first began to be
published? Just because I can find no prohibition anywhere in TKD for using
parts of speech other than nouns to construct new nouns, though I, too, found
evidence for connecting nouns, can someone else point out to me where you
found such a prohibition?
nuH yIwIv 'ej yISuvqa' Sachjaj tlhIngan wo' tlhIngan Hol je peHruS