[tlhIngan Hol] to qaStaHvIS or not to qaStaHvIS

[mayqel qunenoS]

ghunchu'wI:
> SuStel has already given exactly the reasonable arguments I would use. I don't know how to improve on them.

maj. there you go ! I am an idiot, who is unable to understand the obvious.

however, this is truly strange; through the 14 months I have been on
this list, we have discussed countless things; and always we came to a
conclusion.

Unfortunately, at this thread, on this occasion, what has been said so
far fails to explain why the {Soch DIS vorgh jIQuch} is ungrammatical.
The only reasonable explanation is, if someone wrote "because maltz
said so". Instead, there is no "maltz said so", but a countless list
of arguments which leads to nowhere.

Thank you for taking the time to explain all this, but since I can't
understand what's going on here, I will continue using expressions
like {Soch DIS vorgh} without the {qaStaHvIS}.

Perhaps they make sense only to me, but hey, who is actually reading
the klingon posts I write ?

So, lets agree to disagree on this one.

qunnoH jan puqloD
you have some stuffed to'baj leg in your teeth

On Wed, Dec 28, 2016 at 10:21 PM, SuStel <sustel at trimboli.name> wrote:
> On 12/28/2016 3:16 PM, SuStel wrote:
>>
>> It's telling me WHEN something happened, not HOW LONG something took.
>
>
> Or to put it another way: a time expression is just a phrase of some kind.
> Whether it's a time stamp or a time span or both or neither is all in how
> you use it; it's not inherent to the expression. There's no list of
> acceptable time stamps and acceptable time spans.
>
> --
> SuStel
> http://trimboli.name
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> tlhIngan-Hol mailing list
> tlhIngan-Hol at lists.kli.org
> http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org