tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Thu May 22 23:24:55 1997

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: Connecticut qepHom

• From: [email protected]
• Subject: Re: Connecticut qepHom
• Date: Fri, 23 May 1997 02:24:24 -0400 (EDT)

In a message dated 97-05-22 02:41:08 EDT, ghunchu'wI' replies to Thomas
Zeiman:

<< Daj ghu'.  qepHomwIjDaq jeS wa' -- wa'vetlh jIH. >>

I am wondering about this use of {wa'vetlh}, which I have never seen nor even
thought about before.  Although I clearly understand the meaning as "And I
was that one," I would have expected {'ej nuvvetlh jIH'e'}.  Notice that I
have added the N5 '{-e'} to {jIH} deliberately.

OTOH, TKD does say that numbers may act as Nouns (p54).  Without further
evidence contradicting the above usage, why not put Noun Suffixes on numbers?

peHruS

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Connecticut qepHom
    • From: Alan Anderson <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: SuSI (Was: Re: qepHomvo')
• Next by Date: Re: SuSI (Was: Re: qepHomvo')
• Prev by thread: Re: Connecticut qepHom
• Next by thread: Re: Connecticut qepHom
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread
  • Author

Back to archive top level