In order to say that someone is a cardassian, we use the suffix {-ngan}, which means inhabitant:

{qarDaS} + {-ngan} = qarDaSngan = inhabitant of cardassia.

The problem though is, that a cardassian, i.e. someone of the cardassian race, isn't just an "inhabitant" of cardassia. He *is* in a way a *part* of his homeworld, i.e. he feels his homeworld being a part of himself.

If he moved to kronos, and stayed there forever, perhaps he would become an inhabitant of kronos, but he wouldn't identify himself as a klingon.

And of course, he wouldn't fight (let alone die) for kronos, something which he would certainly do for cardassia.

So, I can't understand, how in order to say "he is cardassian", it is sufficient to say {qarDaSngan ghaH} i.e. "he's an inhabitant of cardassia".

Why not say instead {qarDaS loD ghaH} i.e. "he is a man of cardassia" ? Or maybe even {qarDaS Segh loD ghaH} i.e. "he is a man of the cardassian race" ? Or {qarDaS mut loD ghaH} i.e. "he is a man of the cardassian species" ?

I just think that being from somewhere, means way more than just that you inhabit this place.

This comes up all the time, and the basic response to it is "Deal with it."

Klingon uses lexicalized -ngan words to refer to species names, whether they're actually an inhabitant of the named planet. A human is a tera'ngan even if they've never set foot on Earth in their lives.

One might make sense of this by always considering all non-lexicalized ngan phrases two words. If I'm a Klingon living in the First City on Kronos, I'm a tlhIngan who is a veng wa'DIch ngan and a Qo'noS ngan (not a veng wa'DIchngan or a Qo'noSngan). This is not a canonical thing to do.

(On the other hand, are we right to casually suffix ngan to place-names, without including a space? Take the non-coining of compound nouns as single words as a given before considering this.)

-- 
SuStel
http://trimboli.name