tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Thu Mar 27 06:05:52 1997

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

RE: KLBC: lIy Hale-Bopp

• From: DaQtIq <[email protected]>
• Subject: RE: KLBC: lIy Hale-Bopp
• Date: Thu, 27 Mar 1997 09:05:04 -0500
• In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>

mulughmoH SuStel:
>> ghItlh [email protected]:
>> >wa'Hu' ram, lIyHey vIlegh. Hov rur 'ach ngup wew tuQ 'oH. 'IHqubej. 
>> 
>> batlh bIjatlh. lIy DaDelchu'. majQa'!
>> 
>> Dun <ngup wew>. qar 'ej 'IH.
>
>'IHbej, 'ach qarbe'.
>
>As I have pointed out, {wew} means "glow," not "be glowing," so it cannot be 
>used adjectivally.  You'd have to say {wewbogh ngup}.

Qu'vatlh! Hagh qoH neH, HeghtaHvIS SuvwI'pu'.

pIj <mer> <jaH> je vIlo'Ha' je, *be stative*be'mo' wotmeyvam. DaH <wew>
vIchelnIS.

- DaQtIq

• References:
  • RE: KLBC: lIy Hale-Bopp
    • From: "David Trimboli" <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: possible derivation of "va"
• Next by Date: Re: Dax & nuq Hech jIH
• Prev by thread: Re: KLBC: lIy Hale-Bopp
• Next by thread: Re: KLBC: lIy Hale-Bopp
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread
  • Author

Back to archive top level