tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Nov 15 14:20:44 2004
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: "Enterprise" lines
- From: Eric Zay <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: "Enterprise" lines
- Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 14:08:11 -0800 (PST)
- Comment: DomainKeys? See http://antispam.yahoo.com/domainkeys
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; b=xqIgPggZVkqxT2YgjMe5T+/k0uch2fWNqZ24AaOKasZMtGeCTzUm5ESp0Yz3WcJtQ3z8o2MdENyK04BNBU0x/usBVR7zEOI9LAMXgpRZ+7+S2iwa+6Dd4hjry+98Mqpodd+p/100UbWLICkhUVQylOGtJx6E5FOuMcd6nwrVLv4= ;
- In-reply-to: <[email protected]>
Do'Ha' qaStaHvIS "Friday" rammey jIvumnIS. 'entapray' lutvam vIleghpu'be'. lutvam pong 'oH nuq'e'?
SuSvaj
[email protected] wrote:
In a message dated 11/15/2004 8:02:34 AM Eastern Standard Time, Tyler Fisher writes:
>
>> It's an odd way to express it though. {quv lughaj}
>> (they have honor) would
>> be more directly expressed by the bare verb {quv}
>> (be honored, honorable):
>> {quv *archer* HoD beqDaj je.}
>>
>
>I suppose that would be more direct, nonetheless I
>still think it gets the idea across.
>
>The pronunciation was off in several places, but let's
>not nitpick. The point is they were properly formed
>sentences and not the usual Paramount Hol. We should
>be thrilled that for once someone over there actually
>took the time to use the dictionary properly.
>
I agree. In fact, if we could figure out who's responsible
for them, maybe an official KLI thanks would be in order.
-- ter'eS
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
The all-new My Yahoo! ? Get yours free!