tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Thu Mar 10 05:30:31 1994
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
- From: [email protected] (Amy West)
- Subject: Qaghqoq
- Date: Thu, 10 Mar 94 14:47:55 PST
- Organization: NIX - The Network Information eXchange, San Diego CA
On Wed 9 Mar 94 20:50, Mark E. Shoulson writes:
> I'm not sure that a DIvI' necessarily contains nonsentient elements
> any more than a family. Families also have associated paraphernalia,
> coats of arms, pets, etc. Is a family's ancestral home less part of it
> than the planets of the yuQjIjQa'?
I guess that's where the difference in opinion comes from then. I
don't see the possessions of the family, like the family Bible, as
being a part of the family. When someone walks into a family's
house, it doesn't mean they are *in* the family. But yet, I see the
possessions of something like the Federetion as being part of the
Federation.. When someone is in Federation territory, they are
considered to be inside the Federation. The difference is more
apparent when you consider what defines the Federation or a country
or Empire vs what defines a family. So for me, a word like "family"
(although not a plural) is still a collection of family members who
are all capable of using speech and why not make a distinction
based on what makes up the collective?