tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Dec 15 09:29:17 2009

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing



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

{-ghach} revisited (yet again!)

Steven Boozer (sboozer@uchicago.edu)



naHQun:
>> <-ghach> is a whole different story all together.
>> Simple rule: Don't use it unless you know what you're doing.
>>   [snip]
>> For most of us, this means don't use -ghach except for words found in
>> the dictionary, until you have a really good feel for it.

Chris:
>It's funny that you say that, because the sense I got from that
>interview (?) with Okrand is that -ghach is ubiquitous and ends up on
>all kinds of words.  Not some (e.g., bare stems), but a whole lot.  I
>hardly think saying "don't use it unless you know what you are doing"
>is the message that Okrand is conveying there...

Whoa... hardly "ubiquitous"!  

Except for the TKD section on {-ghach} (TKD 4.2.9 IIRC?) and an interview about using {-ghach} in HolQeD (HQ 3.3) - where you would expect to find isolated examples, properly and improperly formed - Okrand actually uses it in only ONE sentence (i.e. {quvHa'ghach} "dishonor"):

  qaStaHvIS wej puq poHmey vav puqloDpu' puqloDpu'chaj je quvHa'moH
   vav quvHa'ghach 
  The dishonor of the father dishonors his sons and their sons for
   three generations. TKW

Although theoretically productive, {-ghach}'ed nouns are almost never used in "authentic" texts.  Perhaps such nouns strike the average Klingon warrior as recondite, sesquipedalian or even cacophonous, which would explain its eschewal.  <g>


-- 
Voragh                          
Canon Master of the Klingons







Back to archive top level