tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri Nov 07 00:51:28 1997
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
RE: SuStel's logic
- From: "David Trimboli" <[email protected]>
- Subject: RE: SuStel's logic
- Date: Fri, 7 Nov 97 08:50:30 UT
[email protected] on behalf of [email protected] wrote:
> SuStel wrote Nov 6 that MO did not know what Pandora's box he was opening
> when he wrote TKD, errors and all.
>
> Even though MO has stated that he never expected tlhIngan Hol to be so
> popular and so deeply studied, I cannot accept SuStel's logic that this is a
> reason to discount what MO has written in black and white in TKD 6.2.5.
> Also, I cannot accept SuStel's logic that because TKD contains errors
> (typos, single-sided glosses, for example) that this particular section is
> in error.
Oh, good grief!!! I never said such things! The Pandora's Box thing was
there to show that Marc Okrand DIDN'T WORK OUT EVERY CONCEIVABLE EXCEPTION IN
THE KLINGON DICTIONARY. He talked about sentences as object, but he probably
never even THOUGHT about a question as object, thus there are no rules in
there about it!
Please stop wildly misinterpreting what I say and repeating it totally wrong.
SuStel
Stardate 97851.8