The reason people suggest avoiding *-ghach* is to avoid the trap that you just fell into: adding a suffix (usually *-taH*) just because you're supposed to, but not really meaning that suffix. *vuttaHghach* doesn't mean /cooking,/ it means /an ongoing act of cooking,/ or /continuous cooking./ That's not what you mean when you want to say /I like to cook./ What you'd want to say is **vutghach vIparHa',* but you can't say that. Make no mistake: adding *-ghach* to a bare verb is /wrong,/ even though Okrand simply called it "marked." Okrand tells us in /HolQeD 3:3/ <http://klingonska.org/canon/search/?file=1994-09-holqed-03-3-a.txt&q=marked> that saying **belghach* is like saying /*pleasureness./ We all understand it, but you don't say it. Klingons might not take it as badly as we would take /*pleasureness,/ but it's still not right. The idea behind *-ghach* is this. Imagine you've got a verb like *bel,* and you've got a magic nominalizer button that, when pressed, turns the verb *bel* into the noun *bel.* Imagine this button works on any verb, but for the moment forget about verbs that don't have known noun counterparts (like *tlhutlh*). Stick a suffix on the verb, and press the button. When we put, say, *-taH* onto *bel* to get *beltaH* /be continuously pleased/ and then press the button, nothing happens. The presence of the suffix blocks our nominalization button. So Okrand comes along and gives us a magic suffix, *-ghach,* which when stuck on the end counteracts the presence of the blocking suffix and lets the nominalizer button work again. We add the suffix and push the button and ZAP! we get *beltaHghach*/ongoing pleasure./ The point of *-ghach* is to hide the verb's other suffixes from the nominalization process, so you can turn the suffixed verb into a noun again. Now, the funny thing is, this process works to counteract suffixes and nominalize verbs that don't actually have noun counterparts! So while I can't use *tlhutlh* to mean /a drink,/ I CAN say *tlhutlhtaHghach*/ongoing drinking./ So people find themselves wanting to use *-ghach* on verbs that don't have noun counterparts, but they're not actually interested in counteracting suffixes; they just want a noun form of the verb. But, the rules say, you can't really use *-ghach* without a suffix. So they go and pick the one that least changes the meaning of the verb (usually *-taH*) just so they can get access to *-ghach,* even though they're not using it for its real purpose. /*TL;DR: WHENEVER YOU FEEL AN URGE TO USE -ghach ON A BARE VERB, DON'T USE -ghach AT ALL. */Find some other way to say what you want to say, like sentences-as-objects. And no, don't put prefixes on verbs with *-ghach.* We don't think you're supposed to do that. On 2/13/2017 4:05 PM, Aurélie Demonchaux wrote:
Thanks for the suggestion!
I was a bit hesitant about -ghach because I remember a discussion about it being a bit tricky to use for a beginner, or possibly "bad Klingon".
But, I guess then if it's ok to use it it could be:
vuttaHghach vIparHa'
(by the way, I don't need to use any prefix in a nominalized verb, right?)
Thanks again!
~mughwI'
2017-02-12 23:08 GMT+01:00 MorphemeAddict <lytlesw@gmail.com <mailto:lytlesw@gmail.com>>:
How about using a noun derived from a verb (by adding -ghach, e.g.) as the object? It involves deciding which other suffix(es) to use so that it doesn't sound odd.
lay'tel SIvten
On Thu, Feb 9, 2017 at 7:25 PM, Lieven <levinius@gmx.de <mailto:levinius@gmx.de>> wrote:
Okay, since others have broken the KLBC-barrier already, and our current BG may be at shore leave, I'll answer this:
Am 09.02.2017 um 13:31 schrieb Aurélie Demonchaux:
We have some examples of <par> and <parHa'> being used with nouns or pronouns but I can't find any canon source where they apply to verbs.
Do you use {'e'} or nothing in those cases?
I will not go into alternatives like {tIv} "enjoy", but simple answer the question grammatically:
The verb {neH} is the only exception for omitting {'e'}. This means that it is correct to say
{jIvut 'e' vIparHa'} "I like that I cook."
Yes, indeed you may think that this literally means "I do like the fact that I am cooking at this moment", but there is no "special" construction to express the common feeling of "I like surfing in general". It's the English that's strange, not the Klingon.
-- SuStel http://trimboli.name