tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri Feb 07 20:15:43 2003

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: Qum

From: "Scott Willis" <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Qum
Date: Fri, 7 Feb 2003 21:21:30 -0500
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>

----- Original Message -----
From: "David Trimboli" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, February 07, 2003 8:50 PM
Subject: Re: Qum


> From: "Scott Willis" <[email protected]>
> > So if we only consider examples from canon, {vIQum} is incorrect, and
> > {ghaHvaD Qum} is correct, right?
>
> I'd stick with /ghaHvaD Qum/ until such time as we get more information on
> /Qum/.
>

Thank you

--ngabwI'
 HovpoH 699640.8

References:
- Re: use of "KLBC"
  - From: "Scott Willis" <[email protected]>
- Re: Qum
  - From: Steven Boozer <[email protected]>
- Re: Qum
  - From: "Scott Willis" <[email protected]>
- Re: Qum
  - From: "David Trimboli" <[email protected]>

Prev by Date: Re: Qum
Next by Date: Re: Thanks to both of you, Quvar and Scott.
Prev by thread: Re: Qum
Next by thread: Re: KLBC
Index(es):