tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Oct 16 20:28:45 2001

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing



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

Re: KLBC: Turning a verb into a noun



From: "Jonas Karlsson" <[email protected]>

> "or we could use the unpopular -ghach.  But -ghach wants to have another
> suffix used with it.  This is covered in TKD p176.  Perhaps in this case
we
> could the suffix -chu' with it.  Qongchu'ghach (a thorough state of
sleep).
> potlh Qongchu'ghach
>
> But don't get carried away with -ghach."
>
> By the way, why is {-ghach} unpopular? Is it because you are forced to use
> it with a suffix, or some other reason?

/-ghach/ has a long history of being misunderstood by the KLI and this list,
controversial and bitter.  There was a time when all we had on /-ghach/ was
what is in THE KLINGON DICTIONARY, and it's not at all clear.  Many people
tried to interpret it their own way, and few agreed on how to use it.

Then Okrand was interviewed about it in HolQeD (Vol. 3, No. 3) (and see also
Captain Krankor's discussion in Vol. 3, No. 4), and much light was brought
to the subject.  What people used to think worked just fine for /-ghach/ was
now learned to be suspect or marked or just plain wrong.  And the interview
brought up even more questions.

Most of the people who'd been studying Klingon for a while decided to avoid
using /-ghach/ as much as possible (which, for some, means "always"), just
so they didn't get it wrong.  They may justify this by saying that Klingon
is a verb-centric language and /-ghach/'d nouns are poor style, or some such
thing.  They also teach that using /-ghach/ is a thing to be avoided.

But there's no reason why we should avoid a perfectly good /-ghach/.  The
thing to remember is that any use of /-ghach/ is all about the verb suffix
between the verb and /-ghach/, not primarily about the verb.  Consider:

naD laj.
He accepts the commendation.

How would I say "He accepts the discommendation"?  "Discommend" is /naDHa'/,
but you can't say */naDHa' laj/ "he accepts the discommendation."  /quvHa'/
can't be the object of /laj/.  You need /-ghach/:

naDHa'ghach laj.
He accepts the discommendation.

(Note: the /-ghach/-fearers will point out that you can say /naDHa'lu' 'e'
laj/ "he accepts that one discommends him."  Sure, that works, but you don't
HAVE to do that.)

Notice how the /-Ha'/ in /naDHa'ghach/ is absolutely integral to its
meaning.  All /-ghach/ is there for is to say "Yeah, I used a verb suffix,
but it's still a noun."

Where this gets screwy is where there is no noun which corresponds to a
verb.  You've got /naD/ "commendation (n)" and /naD/ "commend (v)."  But
what if you want to talk about a noun meaning "sleep"?

"Sleep (v)" is /Qong/, but there is no corresponding noun.  People once
thought that /Qongghach/ would mean "sleep (n)," and it does, in the same
way that "runation" means "the act of running."  It's "marked," meaning that
it's not really accepted as correct, though it follows the rules.  You might
use it when you need a special one-time word that everyone knows is not
normal, but which expresses your meaning.  People often use marked words by
dipping their fingers in quotations marks.  Think of Doctor Evil's "lasers"
(to him, a specially-coined word).

The point of /-ghach/ is the intervening suffix.  /Qongchu'ghach/ is a
perfectly acceptable word: "perfect sleep."  /Qongta'ghach/ is an
"intentionally undertaken and completed sleep."  But what's /Qongghach/?
It's marked, and means "sleep" only with a wink and a nudge.

Some people think /-taH/ is harmless enough to fit in there, to legitimize
the word.  ONLY USE IT IF YOU REALLY MEAN "CONTINUOUS"!  /QongtaHghach/ is
NOT the same as /Qongghach/.  /QongtaHghach/ means "continuous sleep," and
you'd better actually mean "CONTINUOUS sleep" when you use it.  Another
translation might be "unbroken sleep."

So when speaking to the people who have been studying Klingon for a long
time, expect many of them to shy away from /-ghach/.  It's been so abused by
some that they will avoid it simply to prevent others from thinking they can
misuse it.  But really, there's no reason why you can't use /-ghach/
whenever you want to.  I find it to be a VERY cool suffix sometimes, and
very powerful.

But if you DO start to misuse it, I guarantee the /-ghach/ police will hunt
you down.

SuStel
Stardate 1793.4

P.S.: Oh, and just because the title of something in English is a noun
phrase, doesn't mean you have to translate it that way in Klingon.  When I
see /-ghach/ in a title, I'm usually expecting an over-careful translation.
Klingon titles can be sentences and verbs (e.g. /ghobchuq loDnI'pu'/, the
name of a statue).


Back to archive top level