tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri Mar 05 09:11:29 1999
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: Klingon is different
- From: "William H. Martin" <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: Klingon is different
- Date: Fri, 5 Mar 1999 12:11:25 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time)
- In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
- Priority: NORMAL
On Thu, 4 Mar 1999 23:47:49 -0800 (PST) [email protected] wrote:
> There is the likelihood that Okrand studied Aspect from some of the same
> authors we have. He knows perfectly what the classical definition of Aspect
> is. There remains the possibility that he then said to himself as he was
> creating tlhIngan Hol that he would make it different from this. If this is
> the case, we await explanations from him, for all our discussions and
> deductions are for naught after all.
>
> peHruS
The most mysterious part of this kind of declaration is why at
least dozens of people can all agree with no angst whatsoever on
a common understanding of what Okrand has offered, and you can
declare that null and void because you quite singularly can't
get anyone to agree with YOUR quite different version of what
you think he was describing.
You apparently believe we are experiencing mass hysteria, or
there is a conspiracy to delude, and if after dozens of messages
declaring your version consistently fail to convince anyone,
you'll declare the whole issue null and void until Okrand
personally kisses your butt.
Why don't you post to the news list Okrand hosts and see if he
responds to you more positively than we do?
charghwI' 'utlh