tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sun Sep 22 13:50:11 2002

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

RE: tlhIngan Hol lujatlhbogh puq'e'

• From: Stephan Schneider <[email protected]>
• Subject: RE: tlhIngan Hol lujatlhbogh puq'e'
• Date: Sat, 21 Sep 2002 19:36:26 +0200
• In-Reply-To: <a05100302b9b04d4ef12d@[10.0.1.2]>
• References: <[email protected]><a05111b00b98eac74cc6d@[151.25.222.84]><a05100310b99704131a58@[10.0.1.3]><a05111b10b9991d2b00cb@[151.25.221.190]><a05100302b9b04d4ef12d@[10.0.1.2]>

>jIja'pu':
>>Do NOT include sentences like {batlh bIHeghjaj} when trying to figure out
>>an underlying explanation for nouns' behavior.
>
>ja' tulwI':
>>i STOPped and now i think that i don't understand why i stopped. why
>>i shall not include /batlh/? any taboo that i forgot?
>
>The reason is simple:  In that sentence, {batlh} is not a noun.
>
>-- ghunchu'wI'

i think no one wants to keep on discussing this now (as we would only 
repeat over and over the same arguments).

thank you.

tulwI',
sts.

• References:
  • RE: tlhIngan Hol lujatlhbogh puq'e'
    • From: Alan Anderson <[email protected]>
  • RE: tlhIngan Hol lujatlhbogh puq'e'
    • From: Stephan Schneider <[email protected]>
  • RE: tlhIngan Hol lujatlhbogh puq'e'
    • From: Alan Anderson <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: Deconstructing {law'/puS}
• Next by Date: Re: RE: Description
• Prev by thread: RE: tlhIngan Hol lujatlhbogh puq'e'
• Next by thread: Re: tlhIngan Hol lujatlhbogh puq'e'
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread
  • Author

Back to archive top level