tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Sep 03 23:11:40 2002
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: jI-x-ghach?
For those who haven't looked it up, here's what Okrand has to say about
prefixes and /-ghach/ together (from HolQeD Vol. 3, No. 3, p. 13):
My initial reaction is that this needs more study. That is, just as
bare stem + /-ghach/ is okay, but weird, prefix + verb (with or
without a suffix) + /-ghach/ is even weirder. But not unheard of, and
the semantic feel, say with /legh/, would be something like *"I-/you-
seeing," or a "sighting of you by me" as a single concept. I suppose
you
could say that, and people would understand it, but it's weird. An "I-
seeing-you" happened. I can imagine someone saying that in English,
and you'd look up and say "huh?" but know exactly what was
meant. It's following the rules, but it's following them into a place
they don't normally go.
I have a suggestion as to why this is weird. When you put together a word,
what parts are considered first? Do you start with /qalegh/ and then add
suffixes, or do you start with /legh/, add on suffixes (including /-ghach/),
and then finally add the /qa-/?
With /-ghach/ and a prefix together, it looks like you might have to
construct the verb + suffixes, then add the prefix, and THEN add yet another
suffix, /-ghach/ to "wrap" it (to borrow a term from tulwI'). The /qa-/
would be "inside" the /-ghach/. But this would mean you wouldn't normally
add /qa-/ to an already-suffixed verb. Or whatever. It gets messy. And
this, I think, is why not everyone likes the idea of prefix + verb + -ghach.
SuStel
Stardate 2675.4