tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Jul 23 23:09:19 2002

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]

RE: wot <tatlh>

> >qar mu'tlhegh wej, 'ach /chegh/ mu' qaq law' /tatlh'egh/ mu' qaq puS.
> reH qaq 'ay' wa' neH ghajbogh mu'?
> (is a word that has only on component always preferable?)

Not necessarily; but why say more than you need to.
In this case it is not simply being shorter, it is the definitions of the
words that make one more preferable.

Check the thread for Voragh's messages about the canon of the words.

DloraH, BG

Back to archive top level