tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri Jun 30 11:53:10 1995

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: More on "Which?"

• From: "William H. Martin" <[email protected]>
• Subject: Re: More on "Which?"
• Date: Fri, 30 Jun 95 14:53:07 EDT
• In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>; from "William H. Martin" at Jun 28, 95 4:48 pm

According to William H. Martin:
> 
> According to Mark E. Shoulson:
> > 
> .. 
> > Once again, the reason I don't like "*nuqDIch" is that it attaches a
> > numerical suffix (-DIch) to a question-word that doesn't seem the least bit
> > numeric (nuq).  No matter what you say about possible meanings, unless you
> > address that basic problem the construction will *still* bother me (now,
> > whether or not the fact that it bothers *me* is at all significant is
> > another question altogether).
>  
> yIyoq! pabpo' SoH! DunuQchugh mu' vaj mujlaw'.

Ahem! That's yIyoH, of course. I'm trying to get by on
memorized vocab, but sometimes it fails me...

> > ~mark
> 
> charghwI'

charghwI'
-- 

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

• References:
  • Re: More on "Which?"
    • From: "William H. Martin" <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: KLBC - oh no its Khalic again!
• Next by Date: Public Message to "The Wolf"
• Prev by thread: Re: More on "Which?"
• Next by thread: Re: More on "Which?"
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread
  • Author

Back to archive top level