tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sun Jul 25 12:32:51 1999
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: jIDach (KLBC)
- From: [email protected] (Christiane Scharf)
- Subject: Re: jIDach (KLBC)
- Date: Sun, 25 Jul 1999 21:30:49 +0200
jatlh T'Lod:
>In a message dated 7/24/99 12:44:58 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
>[email protected] writes:
>
><< >The verbs I
> >know acting in the way you described are chegh, jaH, ghoS, vIH, paw, and
> >leng.
>
> Are you sure? I've found some debates in the list's archives about this
> topic, and they seem to say that {jaH}, {ghoS} and {leng} are the verbs
that
> work this way. {vIH}, {paw} and {chegh} seem to have not been mentioned to
> work this way. And Okrand clearly stated that there is no general rule for
> this.
>
> HovqIj
> -- temporary BG
>
> >>
>
>Just recently on the Newsgroup, I found a discussion on chegh when Okrand
was
>discussing ghoS and jaH -
[quote snipped]
Oh, I'm so foolish! This was posted to the list only a few days (!) ago. I
even saved the message! DopDaq qul yIchenmoH QobDI' ghu'! rut potlhmey
qawlaHbe'law' yabwIj. jIqanchoHlaw'...
>paw and vIH I am unsure about, and I will stay away from any misuse of
them
>until their position is clarified, but ghoS, jaH, leng, and chegh all work
in
>basically the same way.
Thank you for reposting this. I seem to have Alzheimer's disease.
HovqIj
-- temporary BG
>
>
>T'Lod
>