tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri Mar 05 19:51:59 2004

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: Did Hoch, now pagh...

Alan Anderson ([email protected])

• From: Alan Anderson <[email protected]>
• Subject: Re: Did Hoch, now pagh...
• Date: Fri, 5 Mar 2004 22:50:26 -0500
• In-reply-to: <[email protected]>
• References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>

ja' SuStel:
>Ah, I see.  Hmm, yes, that would seem to make sense, in that it parallels
>the possible {X Hoch} idea.

{X Hoch} isn't just possible.  It's authoritatively correct.

KGT page 155:
  nIn Hoch natlhlu'pu' "All the fuel has been consumed."

-- ghunchu'wI'

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Did Hoch, now pagh...
    • From: "...Paul" <[email protected]>

• References:
  • Did Hoch, now pagh...
    • From: "...Paul" <[email protected]>
  • Re: Did Hoch, now pagh...
    • From: "David Trimboli" <[email protected]>
  • Re: Did Hoch, now pagh...
    • From: "...Paul" <[email protected]>
  • Re: Did Hoch, now pagh...
    • From: "David Trimboli" <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: use of 'e' in to-be construction
• Next by Date: <<'e'>> DIpvaD tammey je
• Previous by thread: Re: Did Hoch, now pagh...
• Next by thread: Re: Did Hoch, now pagh...
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread
  • Author

Back to archive top level