tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed May 27 12:20:59 1998
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
RE: HoghwIj
- From: Terrence Donnelly <[email protected]>
- Subject: RE: HoghwIj
- Date: Wed, 27 May 1998 14:19:45 -0500
At 10:29 AM 5/27/98 -0700, Holtej wrote:
>
>> Hoghvam vebHa' qaS Dajbogh wanI' puS.
>
>I wonder if /nung/ would be better than /vebHa'/? I was able to parse it,
>but I sure does look strange! I suspect there's a word we don't know yet,
>the /Hogh/ counterpart of /Hu'/ and /ben/, as well as a counterpart for
>/leS/ and /nem/. I believe I recall charghwI' saying simply /SochHu'/,
>which may be more precise than "a week ago." (But aren't Klingons always
>precise?)
>
Ironically, I believe I first saw {vebHa'} used _by_ charghwI'. At any rate,
I reallly want a duration stamp, not a timestamp. Maybe {qaStaHvIS nungbogh
Hogh} would be better.
>--Holtej
>
-- ter'eS