tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sat Jan 16 15:21:38 1999
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: -bogh and -wI'
- From: "David Trimboli" <SuStel@email.msn.com>
- Subject: Re: -bogh and -wI'
- Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 16:41:20 -0500
The tricky part is, of course, that your last example could be interpreted
in multiple ways, by your very own "flexible meaning" argument (which is
I need to make it not correct.
I cause it to need to be not correct.
I do not need to make it correct.
I cause it to not need to be correct.
I do not cause it to need to be correct.
I need to not cause it to be correct.
As you see, there are quite a few possibilities, and choosing the one that
doesn't make sense to prove that it doesn't make sense doesn't . . . well,
The REAL trick in figuring out where to put the rover is to decide exactly
WHAT it is you're negating. Are you not needing, or are you not causing?
Choose, and then put the rover on the right one. From that point on, it's
up to the reader to use common sense and figure out which is the correct
meaning. Context is as important as grammar.
From: Andeen, Eric <Eric.Andeen@Sequencia.com>
To: Multiple recipients of list <email@example.com>
Date: Friday, January 15, 1999 3:08 PM
Subject: RE: -bogh and -wI'
>I need to make it not correct - almost the opposite of what I meant.
>I do not need to make it correct / I do not need to correct it - perfect.
>I do not cause it to need to be correct ??!?!? - this one doesn't make any
>sense to me.