tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri Mar 31 19:22:11 2006

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: KLBC (adverbials)

Terrence Donnelly ([email protected])

• From: Terrence Donnelly <[email protected]>
• Subject: Re: KLBC (adverbials)
• Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2006 19:21:46 -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=r5fcV6wx0jtB4iPROE3nkM3llAPrtj+UhpVrZ21pydqTXL2BYe3XlR2q5xqC8lChQVTjlCI3V2I7ecwPyhDoGSVG8lyzYTOUPRFhNlZE6EFGRaJgqQoGLSudoS5dAAWhc5uk8wnSXXowb5r8OvbQ3Q/nPspkNcysI1KgXMQ7IG0= ;
• In-reply-to: <[email protected]>

--- Shane MiQogh <[email protected]> wrote:

> In conclusion of all this, i do beleive you guys are
> saying the following:
>    
>   -No punctuation and adverb affects both verbs.

No, only the main verb.

>    
>   -With commas, it offects the one it's on the same
> side of the comma with.
>

Yes.
    
>   -with (-bogh) it would affect the verb with
> (-bogh) on it.
>    

That's what _I'm_ saying, but I don't think Voragh
would completely agree. 8+)

-- ter'eS

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: KLBC (adverbials)
    • From: Shane MiQogh <[email protected]>
  • RE: KLBC (adverbials)
    • From: "DloraH" <[email protected]>

• References:
  • Re: KLBC (adverbials)
    • From: Shane MiQogh <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: KLBC (adverbials)
• Next by Date: Re: KLBC (adverbials)
• Previous by thread: Re: KLBC (adverbials)
• Next by thread: Re: KLBC (adverbials)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread
  • Author

Back to archive top level