tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Jan 22 11:38:57 2003

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: RE: "to be" and plurals

• From: Quvar valer <[email protected]>
• Subject: Re: RE: "to be" and plurals
• Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 17:03:31 +0100
• In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>

ghItlh DloraH:

>Your sentences don't specify any numerical value other than "multiple".
>What if the captain orders you to fire three torpedoes?
>[wej cha] or if we shouldn't put numbers on inherently plurals, [wej peng]?

Maybe this is just my personal feeling, but I think it should be {wej cha} "three torpedoes", since {cha} is the 
plural form of {peng}, right?

Anyway, this certainly is something that Maltz has to clarify, unless we find an example for this usage.

Quvar.

• References:
  • RE: "to be" and plurals
    • From: "DloraH" <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: tlhegh
• Next by Date: Re: RE: latlh tlhegh tIcheltaH!
• Prev by thread: RE: "to be" and plurals
• Next by thread: Re: "to be" and plurals
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread
  • Author

Back to archive top level