tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Jan 13 21:07:19 2004

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: "ser" and "estar" (to be)

Alan Anderson ([email protected])

• From: Alan Anderson <[email protected]>
• Subject: Re: "ser" and "estar" (to be)
• Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2004 21:41:56 -0500
• In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
• References: <[email protected]><[email protected]><[email protected]>

>It's probably not possible at this stage to declare for certain that /-taH/
>MUST be used on pronouns in "to be" constructions.

It's actually possible to declare for certain that such constructions do
*not* require {-taH}.  Doesn't anyone remember how to ask where the
bathroom is?

  nuqDaq 'oH puchpa''e'

TKD's appendix also includes {nuqDaq 'oH Qe' QaQ'e'}.

-- ghunchu'wI'

• References:
  • Re: "ser" and "estar" (to be)
    • From: Steven Boozer <[email protected]>
  • Re: "ser" and "estar" (to be)
    • From: Steven Boozer <[email protected]>
  • Re: "ser" and "estar" (to be)
    • From: "David Trimboli" <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: RE: DCKL translation problems: {tuj muvwI'}
• Next by Date: Re: DCKL translation problems: {mov}
• Prev by thread: Re: "ser" and "estar" (to be)
• Next by thread: Re: "ser" and "estar" (to be)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread
  • Author

Back to archive top level