[111424] in tlhIngan-Hol
Re: [tlhIngan Hol] male female baby
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Steven Boozer)
Fri Oct 6 04:16:06 2017
X-Original-To: tlhingan-hol@lists.kli.org
From: Steven Boozer <sboozer@uchicago.edu>
To: "tlhingan-hol@kli.org" <tlhingan-hol@kli.org>
Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2017 14:50:09 +0000
In-Reply-To: <b8bbb951-391f-e29b-b630-265df3b7a90c@gmx.de>
Reply-To: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
Errors-To: tlhingan-hol-bounces@lists.kli.org
Unless it's said during {mu'qaD veS}! Actually, both versions would be pretty insulting come to think of it.
--Voragh
-----Original Message-----
From: tlhIngan-Hol [mailto:tlhingan-hol-bounces@lists.kli.org] On Behalf Of Lieven
On 10/3/2017 10:37 AM, Lieven wrote:
>> To avoid the problem, I would make this two phrases:
>> {ghu vIlegh. loD ghaH.}
Am 03.10.2017 um 16:42 schrieb SuStel:
> That implies to my mind that the baby is a man. Say this instead: *ghu
> vIlegh; loDHom ghaH.*
You are definitely right, that's more accurate. I had the same thing in mind as well. But then I thought like, hey, I already said it's a BABY. No need to mention the {Hom}-part any more.
--
Lieven L. Litaer
_______________________________________________
tlhIngan-Hol mailing list
tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org
http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org
