tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Jul 26 13:05:44 2010
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: mu' chu'
- From: "lojmIt tI'wI' nuv" <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: mu' chu'
- Date: Mon, 26 Jul 2010 16:04:43 -0400
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:content-type:mime-version :subject:from:in-reply-to:date:content-transfer-encoding:message-id :references:to:x-mailer; bh=2SgDYP+ijte+UPgF3HQhltRQAeM/+5AjywTNdsl843M=; b=xX4PSGacbReEk7E5KDrohT/LyXaXyC6SyzQl7DE/V8VuRaxTijWf0sb8Pq69xHkXNu rQu+LwxMiSqUIq2jTqkgKWwA4RV7MgUTOldT8kmzV7cM6lTDyFANHt0H7ZZBu/WVcGFQ U7eQHq32IdHUGeHoZ2vRA5iW2dGqHbiEMsluE=
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to:x-mailer; b=uJm9GP1zUcOM6BELjTP0P2dwDAwEwocHijgDWvpR8dP2U/DD8LAm3lyyxWwy6qlJJV JC61ywuDJSH/rb9gqZxjxlcW8U2YiQCrbjVLK7w0a6Q+fOUlyW1vO2jMcC0n6unuGNqX 8emiIXdFb1vDfuclQc0CGzS0kPDwvyWZUi4og=
- In-reply-to: <[email protected]>
- References: <[email protected]>
Of course, once we say that {wa'DIch} can be used adverbially, it follows that after {wa'DIch} comes {cha'DIch}, {wejDIch}, etc. until any given instructional sequence is complete. Otherwise, we're stuck using {ghIq} over and over again... unless {veb} also has an adverbial usage... Likely not.
pItlh.
lojmIt tI'wI' nuv
On Jul 26, 2010, at 12:39 PM, ghunchu'wI' 'utlh wrote:
> ja' Voragh:
>> Time for the ritual post-qep'a' question: Any new words from Okrand this year?
> ...
> We also saw an apparently adverbial {wa'DIch}, confirming that the
> {wa'DIch jagh'e' wIHeghmoHmo'} line in {taHjaj wo'} is appropriate
> usage.
>
> -- ghunchu'wI'
>
>
>