[85755] in tlhIngan-Hol
Re: Once more into the ship in which I fled
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (David Trimboli)
Sat Jun 20 09:09:55 2009
Date: Sat, 20 Jun 2009 09:07:20 -0400
From: David Trimboli <david@trimboli.name>
In-reply-to: <968686.948.qm@web33802.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
To: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
Errors-to: tlhingan-hol-bounce@kli.org
Reply-to: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
mcardle09@yahoo.com wrote:
>> From: David Trimboli <david@trimboli.name> Subject: Re: Once more
>> into the ship in which I fled To: tlhingan-hol@kli.org Date:
>> Friday, June 19, 2009, 7:34 PM McArdle wrote:
>>> I'd be glad to hear other people's reactions to this.
>> Well, it makes for good reading, but I don't see that this solution
>> is any more desirable than any number of other possible invented
>> solutions to the problem, or indeed any more likely to be the
>> "correct" one.
>
> Seriously? It has exactly the same merits and demerits as every
> single one of the other proposed solutions? Or, failing that, at
> least the exact same _balance_ of merits and demerits? That seems
> extremely unlikely on its face.
Your argument is a well-considered, well-argued piece of baseless
speculation. One may as well write a thesis proving Schroedinger's cat
is alive and well inside its box.
> I think the only way this can be true is if you've decided a priori
> that no conceivable proposal has any chance of being "correct" or
> "desirable". Which is, in fact, a defensible position in light of
> Klingon's status as a language with a Single Source of Truth
> (especially when the SST has reputedly found the problem insoluble).
> But it does sort of get in the way of discussion.
What is there to discuss? Your post was interesting, and I read it
carefully all the way through... and there is absolutely no way to
verify any of it. You asked for reactions, and I gave you mine. If
someone else has something to add that is more to your liking, by all
means enjoy the discussion.
--
SuStel
Stardate 9468.9
