tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Feb 23 09:59:59 2004
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[tlhIngan-Hol] Re: words that do not exist
- From: [email protected]
- Subject: [tlhIngan-Hol] Re: words that do not exist
- Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2004 12:59:15 EST
In a message dated 2/23/2004 11:02:29 AM Eastern Standard Time,
[email protected] writes:
Actualy, I think "not technically correct" is kind of mild. I'd call this
glaringly, blatantly wrong. Since {jol} is also a verb, my first thought
on reading this was it meant something like "beam it for the
benefit of the hand" (and I can't imagine what _that_ would mean!).
--qon ter'eS
Did you see my answer to him? i opted for jolHom and i think even joljanHom
would be better. i thought about the hand held thingy and came up with the
problem of the n1-n2 suffix. a friend and i were discussing the very same thing,
although i realized this later. We were talking about a different subject, but
were looking on page 50 of tkd and that is when i noticed the error in the
construction of ghopvaD jol.