There is a klingon, a table, and a chair. And I say to the klingon {yIba'}. Doesn't it stand to reason, that the klingon will understand "sit at the chair" ? Unless he's a moron, or has some table fetish, he *will* understand, "sit at the chair". Now, suppose I say {vIghro' motlh yISuqQo'; vIghro' tIQ yISuq. qaq}. Isn't the meaning obvious, as to *what* exactly is preferable ? How could someone argue that I should specify further, on what exactly is preferable, e.g. by saying {vIghro' motlh yISuqQo'; vIghro' tIQ yISuq. qaq wIvvam} ? If the listener is brain damaged, needing this further clarification, then surely, being obviously stupid, he could still wonder: "what is this choice which is preferable ? obtaining the ancient cat, or some other option which had come up in the discussion, five minutes or five centuries ago ?" Perhaps, klingons are indeed stupid, brain damaged, mentally incompetent individuals. But since humans aren't, I refuse to accept arguments, that one *should* specify further in sentences as the one mentioned. ~ m. qunen'oS