[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.


-----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