tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Nov 04 19:07:41 2003

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: Barclay rur ghaH

Lieven L. Litaer (Quvar) ([email protected])

• From: Lieven L. Litaer (Quvar) <[email protected]>
• Subject: Re: Barclay rur ghaH
• Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2003 01:58:15 +0100
• In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>

Am 04.11.2003 15:41:14, schrieb "Scott Willis" <[email protected]>:

>(I think I'm running out of replacement proverbs.) }}: P

Time to learn some new!
(But I think there is only one more, qar'a'?)

>> Some other possibilities:
>>   {wa' ghot chaH'a' Xindi ghetwI''e', Barclay ghetwI''e' je?}
>>   "Are the Xindi actor and the Barkley actor one person?"
>
>This is what I was going for.

If the verb could be used transitively - which I don't know (do we?) - I'd prefer to say 
   *Xindi Barclay je ghet'a' wa' nuv?*
   "Does one person *act* Xindi and Barclay?"

NB: As I said, IF this is possible.
Is {ghet} only "pretend", or can it mean "pretend to be a person"? Like actors "play" a role.
(Maybe I need to update my HolQeD-stock! :-)

Quvar.

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Barclay rur ghaH
    • From: Steven Boozer <[email protected]>

• References:
  • Re: Barkley rur ghaH
    • From: "Scott Willis" <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: November Qo'noS QonoS
• Next by Date: Re: Klingon WOTD: HoD (n)
• Prev by thread: Re: Barkley rur ghaH
• Next by thread: Re: Barclay rur ghaH
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread
  • Author

Back to archive top level