tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Nov 04 19:41:41 1998
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: KLBC: -ghach
- From: "David Trimboli" <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: KLBC: -ghach
- Date: Wed, 4 Nov 1998 14:18:57 -0500
From: Steven Boozer <[email protected]>
>SuStel wrote:
>
>: Still, since every single other example of a {-ghach}'d verb follows
>: this pattern, and we have quite a number of {-ghach} words in observable
>: usage [...]
>
>No, we do not "have quite a number of {-ghach} words in observable usage"
>Consider: Of the thirteen {-ghach} nouns provided so far by Okrand (out of
a
>total vocabulary of ca. 3000+ items),
I was referring to those which are known, not to those which have been used
in a larger context. The context of these words is irrelevant to the
discussion. How they are used is not in question here. What words may take
{-ghach} was being talked about.
13 words with {-ghach} is a lot, considering that often we have merely one
or two (or none) examples of something else.
If, out of 13 examples, even the ungrammatical ones, 12 of them involve
verbs which also have noun counterparts, I consider this notable, at the
very least.
>Maltz (at least) tends to avoid them, and probably so should we.
But it exists, and is there to be used, so the question is, what's the best
way to decide when to use it? What way is there that will give us the
infrequent use exhibited by Klingons, yet will still allow the suffix to be
useful to us?
SuStel
Stardate 98844.1