tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sun Mar 16 08:01:51 1997

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

RE: KLBC: ghomvaD wa'DIch jabbI'IDwIj

• From: Marian Schwartz <[email protected]>
• Subject: RE: KLBC: ghomvaD wa'DIch jabbI'IDwIj
• Date: 16 Mar 97 10:59:33 EST

ghItlh SuStel
>majQa'!  I didn't know the word {lurgh}!  That's good!
One thing that's necessary is that you have to be able to use {-Daq} phrases 
on relative clauses.  I don't know if we can, but I would suppose so.<

Yeah, I think that if you can't, the structure of relative clauses is restricted
way too much.  By the way, <lurgh> is in the Addendum.  --qoror

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: KLBC: ghomvaD wa'DIch jabbI'IDwIj
    • From: "Mark E. Shoulson" <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: Klingon Times
• Next by Date: KLBC: "problem" as a noun
• Prev by thread: Re: KLBC: ghomvaD wa'DIch jabbI'IDwIj
• Next by thread: Re: KLBC: ghomvaD wa'DIch jabbI'IDwIj
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread
  • Author

Back to archive top level