tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Mar 31 05:48:16 2004

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

ghunchu'wI' QIn vIyajmeH QaH vIpoQbej.

MorphemeAddict ([email protected])

• From: [email protected]
• Subject: ghunchu'wI' QIn vIyajmeH QaH vIpoQbej.
• Date: Wed, 31 Mar 2004 08:47:24 EST

In a message dated 2004-03-30 8:02:36 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
[email protected] writes:

> majIv reH 'e' Daqapmo' jIberghchoH.  qatlh Sovna'maj DatennIS?  not ngoD
> Sovlu'pu' 'e' DaQub'a', DalIjpu'chugh SoH?
> 
chay' Damugh?  
"i get irritable because you insist that we're always ignorant.  why do you 
need to embark our 'definite' knowledge?  do you think that a fact is never 
known if *you* forgot it?"
why is {reH} where it is?  shouldn't it precede {majIv}: "we're always 
ignorant"?  
what does {ten} mean here?

lay'tel SIvten

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: ghunchu'wI' QIn vIyajmeH QaH vIpoQbej.
    • From: "David Trimboli" <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: groan
• Next by Date: Re: Using object prefixes with "intransitive" verbs
• Previous by thread: Re: groan
• Next by thread: Re: ghunchu'wI' QIn vIyajmeH QaH vIpoQbej.
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread
  • Author

Back to archive top level