tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Feb 20 08:41:23 1995
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: vaj
- From: "William H. Martin" <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: vaj
- Date: Mon, 20 Feb 95 11:41:15 EST
- In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>; from "Bill Willmerdinger" at Feb 20, 95 8:38 am
According to Bill Willmerdinger:
>
> uu> From: ur-valhalla!aol.com!DLS9
> uu> Subject: vaj
...
> I see {vaj} in this way: If you are using an IF-THEN construction with
> {-chugh}, {vaj} is really not necessary. The "then" is not needed in Hol.
This is your own personal conclusion, probably based more upon
your use of English than on any canon examples. There are
certainly canon examples that DO use {vaj} in an if/then
construction. This is my point, which you seem to have missed.
> {vaj} is used in QED type proofs. "The Klingon is brave. A brave man has an
> advantage in combat. A man who has an advantage in combat usually wins.
> THUS, a Klingon usually wins." Here, {vaj} would be at the beginning of a
> clause (hell, a sentence) the way an adverbial is supposed to be used.
No argument here.
> Or did I miss your point entirely?
See above.
> Qob
>
> .. So easy, a child could do it. Child sold separately.
Heh.
charghwI'
--
\___
o_/ \
<\__,\
"> | Get a grip.
` |