En réponse à Christopher B Wright <[log in to unmask]>: > Jan nsakwish > >Q.E.D. > > Wow! Another person who actually uses this! I wonder how many people > use > the abbreviation without knowing what it stands for or means, only how > to > use it. "Quid erat demonstrandum": what was to be shown? *Quod* erat demonstrandum! "Quid" means "who" :)) . In French, we actually normally use its direct translation: C.Q.F.D.: Ce Qu'il Fallait Démontrer. And yes, we do use it, though it's considered bad style to overuse it (and extremely pompous to use its Latin counterpart :)) ). As for the meaning, I think in this case the translation "What had to be demonstrated" is nearer to the original intent. It's typically the formula used to end the demonstration of a mathematical theorem after all :)) . Sounds about > right, but it also sounds like the speaker had a sketchy Latin grammar > and a dictionary to make it. Perhaps not. I don't know Latin; I just > have > good reference materials. > Well, yours was the first one I thought of too, and I consider that I do know enough Latin to translate those things by head :)) . > In Hansu, that works out to "Ras lo ndalkik" (with a vocalic n), or > "Thus > I have shown [it]". > Nice expression! Not a direct translation, and still exactly meaning what is intended. Christophe. http://rainbow.conlang.free.fr Take your life as a movie: do not let anybody else play the leading role.