tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri Jul 20 22:49:23 2007

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

RE: using {Hoch} (was Re: Wool? In tlhIngan Hol?)

DloraH ([email protected])

• From: "DloraH" <[email protected]>
• Subject: RE: using {Hoch} (was Re: Wool? In tlhIngan Hol?)
• Date: Sat, 21 Jul 2007 00:48:04 -0500
• In-reply-to: <[email protected]>
• Thread-index: AcfLHAzxocwLFsk4RJG6tyHawWocrgAPhxog

> >Partitive:  If you're talking about "all of" a single thing, it looks
> >like the {Hoch} comes second.  The {HochHom} example is the best
> >evidence I know of to support that interpretation.  If you can
> >replace the word "all" by "entirety", do it that way: {SuvwI' Hoch}
> >"the entirety of the warrior", "the warrior's all".
> 
> ghunchu'wI' is spot on WRT how {Hoch} works, although his 
> example {SuvwI' 
> Hoch}, though grammatical, sounds a bit odd. 

I always use the noun chab when demonstrating Hoch.

Hoch chab
Hoch chabmey
chab Hoch
chab naQ

naQbogh chab Hoch
naQbe'bogh chab Hoch


DloraH

• Follow-Ups:
  • RE: using {Hoch} (was Re: Wool? In tlhIngan Hol?)
    • From: Robyn Stewart <[email protected]>

• References:
  • Re: using {Hoch} (was Re: Wool? In tlhIngan Hol?)
    • From: Steven Boozer <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Corel Draw
• Next by Date: Cayden Price L0W price soft
• Previous by thread: Re: using {Hoch} (was Re: Wool? In tlhIngan Hol?)
• Next by thread: RE: using {Hoch} (was Re: Wool? In tlhIngan Hol?)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread
  • Author

Back to archive top level