tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri Mar 08 02:41:05 1996
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: mu' <poH>: mu'meywIj Qav rIntaH
- From: "Lord Havelock Sinister" <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: mu' <poH>: mu'meywIj Qav rIntaH
- Date: Fri, 8 Mar 1996 10:37:40 GMT
- Organization: North East Wales Institute
- Priority: normal
- Return-Receipt-To: "Lord Havelock Sinister" <[email protected]>
> Even if you collapse a "period of time" into a "point in time", you are
> still talking about that *moment*. You are not referring to the time of
> day at which that moment occurred.
> If you're referring to the reference to the rules being sometimes broken,
> be aware that it's talking about the grammar. Our debate here is over
> the meaning of a noun in the vocabulary, not a grammatical rule.
Oh, for Drokk's sake! Kahless save me from lawyers who believe that
they are linguists!
********************************************************************
"Oh, my God, Professor! It's rampaging down 42nd Street! Guns won't stop it!" - nameless assistant
"I have a theory ... call me a fool if I'm wrong, but ... maybe if you were to load the guns with bullets ..." - Professor Commonsense
email me on [email protected]. Just call me Lord Sinister