tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Feb 23 19:31:36 1999
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
RE: -bogh and -ghach
- From: dspeers@bigfoot.com
- Subject: RE: -bogh and -ghach
- Date: Tue, 23 Feb 1999 22:31:30 -0500
- Importance: Normal
- In-Reply-To: <F1824E0390EBD1118D4C0008C724E4D1C329F6@rock-msg-s1.thomtech.com>
> A headless clause (e.g. <qaleghbogh>) is just too weird.
Sometimes called a "headless relative" by us odd linguistics types. ;)
> pagh
> Beginners' Grammarian
-- Holtej 'utlh