tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Apr 30 09:19:38 1997
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: KLBC: Practicing with questions
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>Date: Wed, 23 Apr 1997 07:44:00 -0700 (PDT)
>From: "William H. Martin" <[email protected]>
>
>I have never found a question using "which" that could not be
>readily recast as a command to choose, show or indicate
>something.
This may be true, but the same may be said about just about any question
using "nuq" in any way at all. Or "'Iv". So Klingon (and most languages)
does sometimes do things one way when there are other (sometimes longer)
options.
On the whole, though, I agree with you. I am less opposed to the use of
"nuq" in some form of possessive construct for "which" than you are in
priciple, but your arguments remain strong in my view (especially after
what happened with Hoch). Ya just can't make these assumptions.
~mark
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2
Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.4, an Emacs/PGP interface
iQB1AwUBM2dxFMppGeTJXWZ9AQG3YwL+KCPgOxTD0b83WLLijCbsq8FWeonv8eW+
jueJ7qpNbZltxIfEUZlEuwHt4F4m9H/Cor15LjjzJ0LYCjHhdq1cSk/3ytqDWMhG
C/RqJUXVNp1fazCxauFJGls+C0WAJDoE
=eOJV
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----