tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Sep 23 22:08:19 2002

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: Dajatlhbogh

ja' Sangqar:
>Dajqu'.  qatlh Hoch QeHmoH QAO, 'ej QeHmoHbe' ghu'vam?  chay' pIm?

chay' pIm?  qajangchu':

<lughbej QAO> jatlh 'op.
bep latlh.  jatlh <Hatbe'law', 'ach Dap 'oH.>
<QAO vIlo'DI' qechwIj Sovba' Hoch> jatlh wa'DIch. qap.
jatlh cha'DIch <qech Damuchlaw'taHvIS, meq DabIvbej>
<SaH 'Iv?  maQum qar'a'?> jatlh wa'DIch.
QeHchoH cha'DIch.  jatlh <Hol'e' wIlo'taH.  bIpabnIS.>
<'ach Hatbe' QAO 'e' DachID!> jatlh wa'DIch,  loQ jach.
pe'vIl jatlh cha'DIch <Hatbe'law', 'ach Dap 'oH. Dap. Dap Dap Dap.>
<chay' Dap 'oH?  yaj Hoch jay'!> jatlh wa'DIch.
nISwI' lel cha'DIch.  jatlh <DIvI' Hol jatlhmo' jay'!>
pu' lel wa'DIch.  lul.  Qoch rIntaH.

The difference is that some insist that Question As Object *is* correct,
it's *obviously* correct, and anyone who disagrees is just plain wrong.
The closest we get to that with Headless Relatives is that both its
strongest detractors and most zealous supporters say it's *probably* not
breaking any rules, while usually agreeing that it's undesireably vague in
most cases.

-- ghunchu'wI'

Back to archive top level