tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed May 24 18:15:30 1995
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: TKD-Daq bIHbe' mu'mey'e'
- From: "William H. Martin" <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: TKD-Daq bIHbe' mu'mey'e'
- Date: Wed, 24 May 95 21:15:27 EDT
- In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>; from "Mark E. Shoulson" at May 23, 95 3:43 pm
According to Mark E. Shoulson:
>
> >...Also, do you think we can backform <lIt> from
> ><lItHa'> above?
>
> "nga'chuq" was given to us by Okrand as it is; there seems to be emphasis
> that it sholdn't be backformed (that's the way Okrand's definition seems to
> me, anyway). I originally heard "lItHa'" as "lIghHa'", which would make a
> lot of sense. Dunno what "lIt" should mean for certain, tho.
I've never seen a mention of any {lIt} or {lItHa'} and would
like a specific context if either does prove to be a word.
> >Brad
>
> ~mark
charghwI'
--
\___
o_/ \
<\__,\
"> | Get a grip.
` |