tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Thu Feb 12 19:24:23 1998

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: leng Saj

• From: Alan Anderson <[email protected]>
• Subject: Re: leng Saj
• Date: Thu, 12 Feb 1998 22:02:15 -0500
• In-Reply-To: <000401bd365c$28b6c640$d916ae98@david>

ja'pu' Qov:
>chaq rut jalthlaHbe'bogh SajvaD <ghaH> lulo' tlhInganpu'

ja' SuStel:
>bIQob, Qov!  :)

It took me a very long time to realize why Sustel said that.  Somehow,
putting a type 5 noun suffix on the subject of a relative clause is
not jarring to me.  It...works.  The meaning flows very naturally.  I
hope we can get some explanation of the grammar behind this sort of
thing soon, so we know how it's *supposed* to work.

-- ghunchu'wI'

• References:
  • Re: leng Saj
    • From: "David Trimboli" <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: poH'a'
• Next by Date: Re: introduction
• Prev by thread: Re: leng Saj
• Next by thread: Re: leng Saj
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread
  • Author

Back to archive top level