[tlhIngan Hol] male female baby
Steven Boozer
sboozer at uchicago.edu
Tue Oct 3 07:50:09 PDT 2017
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 at 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
More information about the tlhIngan-Hol
mailing list