tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Mar 31 18:06:14 2004

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

• Index by Date
• Index by Thread
• Index by Author

Re: it; SIS

Alan Anderson ([email protected])

• From: Alan Anderson <[email protected]>
• Subject: Re: it; SIS
• Date: Wed, 31 Mar 2004 21:05:27 -0500
• In-reply-to: <[email protected]>
• References: <[email protected]>

ja'pu' SuStel:
>> Why is /SIS/ (and, presumably, the other weather
>> words) singled out for special it's-too-obvious-to-say treatment?  And why
>> is there such resistance to considering this on the list?

ja' lay'tel SIvten:
>because, as you've repeatedly pointed out to us, we don't know.  so it's all
>speculation until we're told.

But we *were* told how it's used,  DloraH reported what Marc Okrand had to
say about it YEARS ago.

According to that report, we do know what the subject of {SIS} is.  I see
no basis for SuStel's refusal to accept that fact, and his dismissal of it
as "speculation" is not justified.  I think his usually excellent judgement
has snagged on something in this case, and I'd like to find out what it is,

-- ghunchu'wI'

• References:
  • Re: it; SIS
    • From: [email protected]

• Prev by Date: Re: ghunchu'wI' QIn vIyajmeH QaH vIpoQbej.
• Next by Date: Re: it; SIS
• Previous by thread: Re: it; SIS
• Next by thread: Re: it; SIS
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread
  • Author

Back to archive top level