tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sun Mar 02 21:07:02 1997
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: Hol vIlo' (was Re: Holna' wIlo'bejtaH)
DaQtIq wrote:
>toH! pab potlh law' meq potlh puS pagh meq potlh law' pab potlh puS?
Joel Peter Anderson wrote:
>"Straw Man" "False Dichotomy" pagh Daghaj.
> [DaQtIq appears to create a false dichotomy, reason or grammar'
DaQtIq wrote:
> You seem to misunderstand the Klingon. I would translate my question as:
> "Is grammar more important than intention or is intention more important
> than grammar."
Joel Peter Anderson writes:
>"meq" means "reason", not "intent". That is why I was confused.
Reason, motive, intent... they're similar enough to lump into one
category of meaning here. What confuses you?
>I would say: "ghItlh potlh law' pab potlh puS", or perhaps
>"qa' potlh law' pab potlh puS"
However, if the goal is to produce a readable manuscript but the result
cannot be read, the effort has been wasted. Unless the goal is merely
to expend effort, grammar is at least as important as spirit.
Joel Peter Anderson wrote:
>parmaq potlh law'. qorDu' potlh law'. lalDan potlh law'. pab potlh puS.
> [Love matters much. Family matters much. Religion matters much.
> Grammar matters little.]
Obviously, to you, *<pab potlh puS> indeed. :-(
-- ghunchu'wI'