tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Thu Jun 02 18:11:09 2005

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: More on Ray Charles

MorphemeAddict ([email protected])

• From: [email protected]
• Subject: Re: More on Ray Charles
• Date: Thu, 2 Jun 2005 21:10:46 EDT

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In a message dated 6/2/2005 7:43:05 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
[email protected] writes:


> That being said, as lay'tel SIvten has ably pointed out, {-Ha'} is not 
> really a rover. Klingon grammarians say it is, but it's really a "class 0" 
> suffix: it comes before all others without exception. It even precedes 
> {-'egh} and {-chuq}, the type 1 suffixes. 

Oh, yeah.  Class 0...  Maybe that's why the Klingon grammarians classify 
{-Ha'} as a rover:  it definitely doesn't belong to the other nine, numbered, 
classes of verb suffixes, and rover is all that's left.

lay'tel SIvten

• Prev by Date: Re: More on Ray Charles
• Next by Date: Re: More on Ray Charles: -Ha'
• Previous by thread: Hoch, rom chut je (was Re: More on Ray Charles)
• Next by thread: Re: More on Ray Charles
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread
  • Author

Back to archive top level