tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sun Apr 09 03:58:39 2006

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

[KLBC] RE: *be'nI'nal

Thorwald Peeters ([email protected])

• From: "Thorwald Peeters" <[email protected]>
• Subject: [KLBC] RE: *be'nI'nal
• Date: Sun, 9 Apr 2006 10:57:34 -0000 (GMT)
• In-reply-to: <[email protected]>
• References: <20060409000948.VWPS11322.ibm59aec.bellsouth.net@no1> <[email protected]>
• User-agent: SquirrelMail/1.4.5

<citaat van="Shane MiQogh">
> choHaghmoH.
> DloraH <[email protected]> wrote:  > How would ya'll interpret the word
> {be'nI'nal}?
>
> The first thing that came to mind was: You're from Arkansas and you
> married
> your sister.

So we've ascertained it's not to be used unless in jest.
But the question that remains is: how *do* you say "sister-in-law"

 be'nal lodnI'wI'?

Thorwald Peeters
a.k.a. qa'pIn qorghon puqloD, q'meQ tuq
a.k.a. SoplaHtaHwI'
yuch betleH 'obe' la'quv

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: [KLBC] RE: *be'nI'nal
    • From: "Thorwald Peeters" <[email protected]>
  • Re: [KLBC] RE: *be'nI'nal
    • From: Alan Anderson <[email protected]>

• References:
  • RE: *be'nI'nal
    • From: "DloraH" <[email protected]>
  • RE: *be'nI'nal
    • From: Shane MiQogh <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Klingon WOTD: raQpo' (noun)
• Next by Date: Klingon WOTD: pIl (verb)
• Previous by thread: RE: *be'nI'nal
• Next by thread: Re: [KLBC] RE: *be'nI'nal
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread
  • Author

Back to archive top level