Re: KLBC challenge

["William H. Martin" <whm2m@cms.mail.virginia.edu>]

Good point. I think it might be even better stated as:

{vay' leghlaHbe'} rather than {pagh leghlaH} or even 
{leghlaHbe'} alone. Perhaps {lojmIt neH leghlaH} would work or 
{lojmIt SoQmo' Hur leghlaHbe'}.

charghwI' 'utlh


On Wed, 30 Jun 1999 23:28:26 -0400 TPO <cheesbro@rpa.net> wrote:

> >lojmIt 'emDaq vay' leghlaHbe' SuvwI'.
> >
> >
> >SoQmo' lojmIt lojmIt 'emDaq pagh leghlaH SuvwI'.
> 
> 
> I may be reading into this too much, but...
> 
> [...pagh leghlaH ...] doesn't fit right in my mind.
> "He is able to see <nothing, void, lack of something>"
> There is a window in the door, he can see that there is "nothing"; nobody is
> there.
> 
> I prefer the [..leghlaHbe'..] in the first sentence; after all, because of
> the door he is "not able to see" who is there.
> 
> 
> DloraH