tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Nov 16 18:22:01 2011
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: [Tlhingan-hol] nuq bop bom: 'ay' choghmaH vagh: <Hota'ro' ta>
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 8:05 AM, Qov <[email protected]> wrote:
> "latlh DujDaq parmaqqay ghaj."
lut qo' tIn law' Duj tIn puS 'e' vIqawqa'.
> "Heghchugh HIvemmoHneS."
not mu'tlhegh vIlaDpu' 'e' vIpIH.
> ghumHa'be'choHmeH noch pat ghunqa' HoD.
Hotlhqa'be'chugh nIyma', qetlhtaH leng.
> nuplaw' tlhuHmey...
Qopba' porgh...'ach lut qonwI' vISov. chaq nutoj ghu'. chaq yInSIp
luSuqchoHlI'mo' be' 'Iw, vumqu'be'laH taghDu'. jItulqangbe'.
> Hujbej Qel taHom Qav. motlh bIjmo' qaSbe'law' QIHvetlh. bong qonlaw'.
Hujqu'. ghaytan jIH mIS law' HoD mIS puS.
> vIHchoH Hota'ro'. jatlh HoD "Hota'ro', choQoylaH'a'?"
>
> "HIja'," jatlh DeghwI'. nach tlhe'moH 'ej HoD leghlaHlaw'. tam ghoghDaj 'ach
> Qap.
jItulchoH.
> chaq nItmo' meH muD, naDev tlhuHtaHvIS tar 'uchHa' 'Iw 'ej yInSIp
> lo'qa'laHlaw'.
How much of this is {chaq} intended to cover? I'm unsure whether the
speculation extends to the entire thing, or just to the opening {-mo'}
clause.
> jatlh Hota'ro', "vImejbe'pu'. waw'Daq jIHtaHvIS mumejmo' muQay wo'. wa' nuv
> loSbe' may'Duj."
nuvvetlh loSbe''a' neH? chaq chIch ghaH lonta' parbogh HoD. Qapla' --
muSIvqu'moH Hota'ro' qun. Hoch vISov vIneHchoH.
-- ghunchu'wI'
_______________________________________________
Tlhingan-hol mailing list
[email protected]
http://stodi.digitalkingdom.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol