tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Sep 24 22:41:45 1997
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: KLBC: -ghach
- From: [email protected]
- Subject: Re: KLBC: -ghach
- Date: Thu, 25 Sep 1997 01:41:34 -0400 (EDT)
In a message dated 97-09-24 11:28:55 EDT, SuStel writes:
<< I once postulated this myself, and thought it was quite a nice
interpretation.
If you're saying the same thing I was (it's too late for me to think that
technically), you're saying that {-ghach} would only be used on a verb which
has an analogous noun. Thus {Qong} "sleep (v)," which doesn't have a noun
counterpart, couldn't be used with {-ghach}. >>
peHruS jIH
While I, too, avoid putting {-ghach} onto words, and this reply goes off your
original subject, I wish to point out that while we do not have a gloss for a
noun counterpart for {Qong} we do have strong evidence that {Qong} is also a
noun. MO has pointed out that {QongDaq}, "bed", is a compound noun which
uses an archaic noun {Qong} which is now lost and not used in modern speech.
While I still believe that there are many more nouns in Klingon which we know
now only as verbs, I refuse to use even words which have been used by MO as
nouns in the way {Qong} has in {QongDaq} unless he himself releases these
words from their archaic, useless position and makes them clearly useable by
us. This is why I have modified my stand on making up compound nouns from
words which are not clearly defined already as nouns.
Qapla'