tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Aug 21 16:38:27 1996
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: existence
- From: "William H. Martin" <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: existence
- Date: Wed, 21 Aug 1996 19:38:17 -0400 ()
- Priority: NORMAL
On Fri, 9 Aug 1996 00:43:06 -0700 "A.Appleyard"
<[email protected]> wrote:
> For "X exists" we have been advised to write {X tu'lu'}, on the grounds that
> "X's existence can't be known of unless someone has found it". But to say
> "Theory shows that X exists, but nobody has yet found it"? This construction
> occurs referring to a very important central matter in a story that I have.
First, theories do not "show" anything. A theory is an
inconclusively tested model of some aspect of reality. A
theory merely proposes that something exists or explains
why something exists which we know exists.
Given that, facing your challenge to express your thought
in Klingon:
Dochvetlh tu'laH vay' 'e' chup ngervam 'ach wej tu'lu'.
I say this suggesting that if a tree falls in a forest and
nobody hears it, a Klingon does not care whether or not
there is any sound. I'm sure the Vulcan language would
offer a different approach...
I also offer that I would never use the number "three" as a
noun in the object position, because I like to be clear. I
guess I could say:
Dochvetlh tu'laH vay' 'e' chup ngervam 'ach tu'ta' pagh.
charghwI'