[EVA] Lance = S^2 Proof (L=S^2P) [Expanded/New]
ebj.nerv at flashnet.it
Sat Apr 8 01:39:08 EDT 2000
> I do some of my best work (DPP, L=S^2P) during such intervention.
So in order for light to exist, there must be dark. But which is which?
> They knew exactly how to process and adjust it, which implies a
> familiarity with its workings. And as far as SEELE telling them how it
> works, don't you think Dr. Katsuragi would find it a bit odd to have
> someone else was instructing him on the proper use of his theory?
Not if these people were the ones that allowed him to go on with his
experiments, which were all he had left after Mrs katsuragi divorced. And I say
again, thay may have known what the yhad been made into believing, maybe just
enough to start a process they wouldn't be able to control.
> In both cases contact is made.
> Given the situation, I still say that is all that is necessary?
To know if it happened by sheer contact or by their inabilty to control the
situation has a consequence on the probability that they were bound to loose it
before they started or not.
> Yes. The subject they are discussing is the Lance, and they specifically
> say "contact experiment with the provider/donor."
> *blink* Masochistic? Fumbling?
> Well, screw those peoples' Japanese skills.
Why not yours? (wait, it's rethoric, see below)
> I have both a print reference and specific grammar points that say my
> translation of Misato's line is correct, and I will go head to head with
> anyone, anytime about it.
Yet any other people who speak Japanese I've met, after watching it are
convinced that the pause Mitsuishi Kotono puts in the sentence turns the meaninh
otherwise, and that said pause grants for one meaning only *in the show*, no
matter what was written anywhere else.
> I see the above statement as nothing more than
> a cheap shot in order to retain your precious ambiguity -- if so, then
> we can end the debate right now, because to continue under assumptions
> like that is a waste of my time.
No it is not. You said yourself you inquired people about this and they agreedm
yet not you nor me can present a bunch of japanese guys who watched the movie
when it was aired and were convinced of either version, so neither of us has a
definite proof, therefore the ambiguity stands. I do not mean to say that you're
wrong, I cannot because I don't have the proper knowledge, but your version
doesn't look all that convincing. Completely different is the part about the
Lance though. If the subject of the sentence is unambiguously the Lance, then it
cannot be otherwise.
Emanuele Barone - ebj.nerv at flashnet.it Jobs | |¯ the Mac
-- www.macstep.com -- is at | _ |_ with
More information about the oldeva