On Tue, 11 Apr 2006, rick1walter~at~comcast.net wrote:
> You finish saying: <I come to the conclusion that Verne was talking "feet"
> not "miles" in the paragraph.>
> By this logic, your cetacean is a thousand feet wide and three feet long.
> Surely not.
You could also read it as:
> rejetant les évaluations timides qui assignaient à cet objet une
> longueur de deux cents pieds et en repoussant les opinions exagérées
> qui le disaient large d'un mille et long de trois
"a length of 200 feet" ... "one thousand [feet] wide and three [thousand]
But I would say that Verne really means 1x3 miles.
Received on Wed 12 Apr 2006 - 10:22:39 IDT