tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Thu Jun 15 14:47:34 1995

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

• Index by Date
• Index by Thread
• Index by Author

Re: This and that

• From: "William H. Martin" <[email protected]>
• Subject: Re: This and that
• Date: Thu, 15 Jun 95 17:47:31 EDT
• In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>; from "Matt Gomes" at Jun 15, 95 2:24 pm

According to Matt Gomes:
> 
> qaghItlhneS:
> 
>   I'm trying to make sure I understand how to say a couple things:
> 
> That is correct
> lugh Dochvetlh
> 
> That is good
> QaQ Dochvetlh
> 
>   Those sound right?  If not... what does?
> 
> -M

Technically, these are okay. The problem is that we do not know
that {Doch} carries all the meanings of the English "thing". It
may very well only refer to physical objects. This leaves us
changing "this" and "that" into words that specify what we are
talking about, like {lugh qechvetlh} and {QaQ ghu'vetlh}.

charghwI'
-- 

 \___
 o_/ \
 <\__,\
  ">   | Get a grip.
   `   |

• References:
  • This and that
    • From: [email protected] (Matt Gomes)

• Prev by Date: This and that
• Next by Date: Re: This and that
• Prev by thread: This and that
• Next by thread: Re: This and that
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread
  • Author

Back to archive top level