tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Mar 30 20:50:00 1999
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: qama'
In a message dated 3/30/99 4:37:10 AM Eastern Standard Time,
[email protected] writes:
<< Neither will ghunchu'wI' be able to accuse me of MIS-thinking that
Chinese's
{wan} is unlike tlhIngan Hol's {-pu'}. It turns out that they work exactly
the same way after all. He was way too hasty in that accusation. Of course,
{wan} is only perfective if used in conjunction with {le}, {liao}, {je},
{ne},
etc. Elsewise it is perfect aspect (not tense).
peHruS
>>
STILL fighting the others, eh? Oh, wait, I forgot, reH bIlugh 'ej reH
lughbe' Hoch, especially when it comes to Chinese. My mistake.
T'Lod Doy'