tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri May 05 10:57:28 1995

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: pagh no'lI' (was: Re: pagh (was latlh))

• From: "William H. Martin" <[email protected]>
• Subject: Re: pagh no'lI' (was: Re: pagh (was latlh))
• Date: Fri, 5 May 95 13:57:51 EDT
• In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>; from "Silauren, Half-Elven" at May 3, 95 4:20 pm

According to Silauren, Half-Elven:
> 
> On Wed, 3 May 1995, William H. Martin wrote:
> 
> > I thought it might be even MORE insulting as no'law'lI'. qar'a'?
> 
> ghobe'!  qarbe'!  charghwI', isn't <-law'> a verb suffix??  
> or am i missing some non-TKD canon definition of a verb-root <no'>?
> 
> > charghwI'

Sorry. Haven't been myself lately. HIvqa' veqlargh!

> --naQ'avwI'

charghwI'
-- 

 \___
 o_/ \
 <\__,\
  ">   | Get a grip.
   `   |

• References:
  • Re: pagh no'lI' (was: Re: pagh (was latlh))
    • From: "Silauren, Half-Elven" <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: nuqDaq 'oH jabbI'ID'a'
• Next by Date: Re: "size" and -ghach
• Prev by thread: Re: pagh no'lI' (was: Re: pagh (was latlh))
• Next by thread: Re: pagh no'lI' (was: Re: pagh (was latlh))
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread
  • Author

Back to archive top level