tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Jan 20 02:21:29 2003

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: tlhegh

• From: Quvar valer <[email protected]>
• Subject: Re: tlhegh
• Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 08:29:20 +0100
• In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>

Am 19.01.2003 20:50:25, schrieb "David Trimboli" <[email protected]>:

I wrote:
>>Does {tlhegh} also mean an empty "line" in a letter??!

ghItlh SuStel:
>jIHvaD qay'be' lo'vam.  'a maSovchu'be'.

I came up with this thought because in German for instance, the word for "line" in a letter is completely 
different than the word for "line" as a rope. And that's the definition MO gave us.

'a jIHvaD qay'be' je lo'vam.. qen jIqeqmeH Hoch mu' vIbuSchu'taH neH.
rut mu' Dajqu' ghomlu'. rut qaStaHvIS jaj law' mu' vIqelbogh vIbuS, QIn ghomvaD vIngeHpa'.

Quvar
  jup ghajlu'meH
  jup DanISlu' neH

.

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: tlhegh
    • From: Steven Boozer <[email protected]>

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

• Prev by Date: Re: "to be" and plurals
• Next by Date: Re: "to be" and plurals
• Prev by thread: RE: tlhegh
• Next by thread: Re: tlhegh
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread
  • Author

Back to archive top level