tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Oct 24 14:31:28 2006

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

• Index by Date
• Index by Thread
• Index by Author

Re: what is canon?

Thorwald Peeters ([email protected])

• From: "Thorwald Peeters" <[email protected]>
• Subject: Re: what is canon?
• Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2006 23:31:02 +0200 (CEST)
• In-reply-to: <[email protected]>
• References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
• User-agent: SquirrelMail/1.4.8

<citaat van="Alan Anderson">
> ja' lay'tel SIvten:
>
>> Voragh,
>> You often comment on a KWOTD that such and such a word has never
>> been used in
>> canon, even though the word itself is a part of canon; i.e., it
>> occurs in one
>> of Okrand's works.  What is this narrower definition of canon you
>> are using?
>
> The obvious distinction is simple: there is a difference between
> "use" and "mention".  Simply listing a word is not the same thing as
> using it in context.

I believe Voragh distinguishes between Paraborg and Okrandian canon...
But I hope he can comment on it himself soon...

-- 
Thorwald Peeters
a.k.a. qa'pIn qorghon puqloD, qI'meQ tuq
a.k.a. SoplaHtaHwI'
Duj tlhIngan wo' "Qebmey Tai joH"Daq Doq puHvaD Hung loD'e'

• References:
  • what is canon?
    • From: [email protected]
  • Re: what is canon?
    • From: Alan Anderson <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: what is canon?
• Next by Date: Re: the ballad of the harp-weaver
• Previous by thread: Re: what is canon?
• Next by thread: Jesus' General
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread
  • Author

Back to archive top level