tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Thu Jun 24 21:22:31 2004

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

RE: another canon 'mistake'?

Alan Anderson ([email protected])

• From: Alan Anderson <[email protected]>
• Subject: RE: another canon 'mistake'?
• Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2004 23:21:48 -0500
• In-reply-to: <[email protected]>
• References: <[email protected]>

ja' pagh:
>But it's not. It's <ghe''orDaq luSpet 'oH DaqlIj'e'>. This literally
>means "In the netherworld, your place/location is a black hole". If
><DaqlIj> can take on a connotation anything like the word "place" in
>English (e.g. "A woman's place is in the home"), then this means exactly
>what it is supposed to. And since we know the translation is correct, we
>must infer that this interpretation of <Daq> is correct as well.

majQa'!  mu'tlhegh DaQIjchu'ta'.  not Sengqa'jaj.

chaq tlhoy maq <meqnIS>.  lughlaw' <meqlaH>.  jaS yajlaHba' vay'.  reH
qay'rup 'op'e', 'ej lughchu'chugh vuDlIj, <mIvDaq vIghro'> ngaq nge'.

-- ghunchu'wI'

• References:
  • RE: another canon 'mistake'?
    • From: "Eric Andeen" <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: {-wI'} nouns
• Next by Date: Re: mIvDaq yIH
• Previous by thread: RE: another canon 'mistake'?
• Next by thread: Re: another canon 'mistake'?
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread
  • Author

Back to archive top level