tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri Nov 21 11:51:19 1997
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: KLBC: QAO lut
- From: "David Trimboli" <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: KLBC: QAO lut
- Date: Fri, 21 Nov 1997 12:40:59 -0500
-----Original Message-----
From: Qov <[email protected]>
To: Multiple recipients of list <[email protected]>
Date: Friday, November 21, 1997 1:04 AM
Subject: Re: KLBC: QAO lut
>It works for me, and we have canon in that a duel second is known as a
>{cha'DIch}. That suggests that the ordinal numbers can be treated as
>nouns--and SuStel has just pointed out in another thread that Okrand stated
>explicitly that numbers can be subjects and
I pointed this out? I don't believe I was even involved in the numbers as
subject thread (though my memory has been otherwise occupied as of late).
You did not finish this sentence either. Hmmm.
As for {cha'DIch}, it is possible that this is a very restricted use. It
*is* used in a very traditional sort of way, and there's no way to know if
it may, perhaps, be a shortened version of something longer (second
<something>, maybe). I wouldn't go and assume that all ordinal numbers are
normally used as nouns without more evidence.
Second *what*, anyway?
SuStel
Stardate 97891.1