Multiple emporers in a reign, revisited

Maximilian Wilson wilson.max at gmail.com
Mon Mar 13 10:33:11 PST 2006

On 3/13/06, Jon_Lincicum at stream.com <Jon_Lincicum at stream.com> wrote:
> "Scott Schultz" <scott at cjhunter.com>
> >===
> >The Imperial Palace was begun shortly before the reign of Emperor Jamiss
> I,
> >and the earliest version was completed toward the end of his reign, which
> >encompassed, in its nine hundred years, the entirety of the reign of the
> >House of the Vallista in the First Cycle.
> >===
> To me, this statement appears to be about the /palace construction/ taking
> the entirety of the first Vallista reign, not Jamiss' custodianship of the
> Orb.

I don't see how that's grammatically possible. There are four possible
antecedents to "which" in the above sentence: palace, reign, version,
and reign. It doesn't make any sense to say the "Imperial Palace...
encompassed... the entirety of the reign of the House of the
Vallista." Same goes for "version." It would be different if the
phrase "palace construction" appeard in the paragraph, but it doesn't.
There's also parallelism between the "reign of Emperor Jamiss" and the
"entirety of the reign of... the Vallista."

Thanks, Scott. As far as I'm concerned, this passage is conclusive.


Be pretty if you are,
Be witty if you can,
But be cheerful if it kills you.