tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Mar 25 05:14:17 2002

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

• Index by Date
• Index by Thread
• Index by Author

RE: [KLBC] loQ jIqeqnIS neH

• From: DOOM_er <[email protected]>
• Subject: RE: [KLBC] loQ jIqeqnIS neH
• Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2002 11:17:24 +0100
• In-Reply-To: <000201c1d3b8$e9e92b20$c14fe8cd@dlorah>
• References: <[email protected]>

At 23:52 24-3-02 -0500, you wrote:
> > qavan DloraH,
>
>Perhaps a , should be put in there because DloraH is not the subject.
>qavan, DloraH.

But, doesn't the verb prefix qa- already indicate DloraH isn't the subject?


> > qaStaHvIS 'op poH tlhIngan Hol vIghoj,
>
>'op poH?  jarmey?  wa' DIS?  vagh DIS?

'op jarmey. loS jar.


> > 'ej vaj pIj jIqeqnIS 'e' vIwuqta'.
>
>TKD p66: ...the second verb never takes an aspect suffix.
>So we can't have  /'e' vIwuqta'/

Ok, right... so... /'ej vaj pIj jIqeqnISta' 'e' vIwuq/ then?


>DloraH, BG

Dum'er, B

• Follow-Ups:
  • RE: [KLBC] loQ jIqeqnIS neH
    • From: "DloraH" <[email protected]>

• References:
  • [KLBC] loQ jIqeqnIS neH
    • From: DOOM_er <[email protected]>
  • RE: [KLBC] loQ jIqeqnIS neH
    • From: "DloraH" <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: KLBC: {-be'}
• Next by Date: pIn'a'
• Prev by thread: RE: [KLBC] loQ jIqeqnIS neH
• Next by thread: RE: [KLBC] loQ jIqeqnIS neH
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread
  • Author

Back to archive top level