tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Sep 03 23:11:40 2002

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

[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
    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.

Stardate 2675.4

Back to archive top level