tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Thu Jan 12 08:55:11 2006

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: walk two miles

Terrence Donnelly ([email protected])

• From: Terrence Donnelly <[email protected]>
• Subject: Re: walk two miles
• Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 08:54:59 -0800 (PST)
• Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=sbcglobal.net; h=Message-ID:Received:Date:From:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=dHilRJieGsLG6SzwQBoNlAclnszFmgWrdQ2p7CmxVG+kCjzOgMMG3E/bZjrkgHrReQjbkeZOmMTWG5dR7FPS4WMGYIqfifNTfupWu1j2gEswy+cJwH63mGmyvmle+LXlwPItiIL/fR+egAJQGrJ3lOXpPFXcEtXWIv8z+vjx5hg= ;
• In-reply-to: <[email protected]>

This is really one of those imponderables we just
don't have 
enough data to resolve, but when (if?) Maltz gives us
more
information, I think it would be great if the behavior
of
spacial measures paralleled temporal ones. It would be
cool
if there was a verb X that was the spacial equivalent
of
{qaS}, so you could say {X-taHvIS cha' qelI'qam}. 
Lacking
that, maybe we could use {cha' qelI'qam juvlu'taHvIS
jIleng}.
To keep the parallel with temporal measures,  a naked
measurement
would be a "locationstamp": {cha' qelI'qam jIHop} "I
am two
kellicams away."

-- ter'eS

• References:
  • Re: walk two miles
    • From: Steven Boozer <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: walk two miles
• Next by Date: Re: transitivity
• Previous by thread: Re: walk two miles
• Next by thread: easy question
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread
  • Author

Back to archive top level