tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Thu Apr 22 07:22:29 2004

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

• Index by Date
• Index by Thread
• Index by Author

Re: Probability

Teresh000 ([email protected])

• From: [email protected]
• Subject: Re: Probability
• Date: Thu, 22 Apr 2004 10:21:43 -0400

ghItlh QeS lagh:

> 
> jangpu' ter'eS:
> >I didn't see Voragh's reply the first time, so I don't know everything
> >he wrote, but I don't see the relevance of this example.
> 
> It shows we can make a quantification of something just by saying {NUMBER 
> vatlhvI' EVENT}, and from there, I'd imagine that we could use 
> garden-variety verbs: {vaghmaH Soch vatlhvI' SISmeH DuH / 'eb} (assuming 
> that we all accept {SISmeH DuH / 'eb}) would be "57% chance of rain". Thence 
> we can get
> 
> {wa'leS vaghmaH Soch vatlhvI' SISmeH DuH tu'lu'}
> "tomorrow there will be [observed] a 57% chance of rain"
> 
> {<<DaHjaj wa' vatlhvI' neH peDmeH DuH tu'lu'>> vIjatlhlu', 'ej qaSchoH nuq? 
> peDchu' jay'!}
> "I was told that there was only a one percent chance of snow today, and 
> what's happened? It's bloody snowing!"
> 
> It seems to work well from my point of view. wa' DoS wIqIp'a'?
>

vIlajqang.  Although, as I said in another post, the whole idea of applying
a probability to an event has become strange to me.  I still kind of like
expressing it as one's degree of certainty:

{DaHjaj peDmeH wa' vatlhvI' DIch ghajlu'mo', DaSwIj vItuQbe' jay'}
"I didn't wear my boots today because there was only a one percent chance of snow!"

-- ter'eS

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Probability
    • From: "David Trimboli" <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: QIpwI' jIHmo', QaH vIpoQ...
• Next by Date: Re: Klingon WOTD: qIl (v)
• Previous by thread: Re: Probability
• Next by thread: Re: Probability
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread
  • Author

Back to archive top level