tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Apr 28 06:24:11 2008
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: Canonicity
- From: Doq <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: Canonicity
- Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2008 09:22:29 -0400
- Authentication-results: smtp07.embarq.synacor.com [email protected]; auth=pass (LOGIN)
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; d=embarqmail.com; s=s012408; c=relaxed/simple; q=dns/txt; [email protected]; t=1209388950; h=From:Subject:Date:To:Mime-Version:Content-Type; bh=LIsag9pE8K9PsWsAMpWobYG1yYs=; b=dON9Tf9bJOrOyUFyzOiShtVXkk6Zz/NZvS1ZkiKtjMz8Q9uDxIFbEeI8Lz7hSlrt ugLHYHKbGVguz89slrIepOmlvl3GUYoptu7Jer+1PGj3NZSCB/y9hGCLWmgr2KnD;
- In-reply-to: <[email protected]>
- References: <[email protected]>
- X_cmae_category: 0,0 Undefined,Undefined
All canon comes from Okrand. If there are degrees of canon, they are
not differentiated by who they came from. They are merely
differentiated by the degree of certainty that they came from Okrand.
If they came from anybody else, then they are, by definition, not
canon. You can try to claim that these other words from other sources
might make sense to a Klingon, but they are not, to ANY degree, canon.
In other words, there's canon-na' published directly from Okrand.
There's canon-Hey quoted of Okrand in informal pronouncement by
someone trusted by the Klingon community to not make this stuff up,
and then there's canon-qoq which may or may not be derived from canon
in some indirect way, but Okrand wasn't the source. The Klingon in the
novels rides the edge between -Hey and -qoq because sometimes authors
and editors change things after Okrand has seen it, and universally,
these things are written and edited by people who do not by any
stretch of the imagination understand Klingon, and so they really
can't be trusted beyond perhaps maintaining the correct spelling of a
noun or two written out for them by Okrand. Most typically, these are
nouns, especially if they refer to fictional species of plant or
animal or other words useless to general conversation common to KLI
communication.
There is the Extended Corpus project the KLI publishes at </stuff/ECP.html
> . Keep in mind that the Extended Corpus is "extended" in that all
of it is, by definition, not canon.
There are no different sources of canon. There are simply different
citations of our single source of canon. Okrand's canon can be cited
from the movies he coached, or the publications he wrote, or the
publications he was consulted for, etc. Every time he offers new words
or grammatical clarifications, there are new citations, but it still
all comes from one source.
Get somebody to explain the history of the word {'I'} sometime. In
terms of degree of canon, it is one of the more interesting words in
the language. It was intentionally created as an example of non-canon,
then it was mistakenly thought to be canon, and then it became canon.
No other word in the language has had that evolution.
Doq
On Apr 27, 2008, at 8:28 AM, Jonathan Webley wrote:
> I get confused with all the different sources of canon. Is there a
> definitive list somewhere?
>
>
> I thought it might be useful to classify the canon, and this is a
> first
> attempt. I would be grateful for any additions, amendments, etc.
>
>
>
> Where would the Star Trek Encyclopaedia (STE?) fit? There are some
> abbreviations that are commonly used which I don't know:
>
> * DS99, possibly Deep Space 9
> * ENT, possibly Star Trek: Enterprise
>
>
>
>
>
> Level 0
>
> Words, phrases or grammar that are not tlhIngan Hol. This class would
> include klingonaase and words such as "gin'tak".
>
>
>
> Sources:
>
> * TFR: The Final Reflection
> * etc
>
>
>
>
>
> Level 1
>
> Words, phrases or grammar that are devised by someone other than
> Okrand or
> the KLI. Some phrases may be generally accepted as useful, but on
> the whole
> the Klingon is not universally acknowledged.
>
>
>
>
>
> Level 2
>
> Words, phrases or grammar that were devised by the Klingon Language
> Institute. Whilst it is acknowledged that the KLI does not have the
> power or
> authority to devise new Klingon, any interpretations or usage are
> considered
> useful additions to the language. This material could summarily be
> overturned by Okrand. It is not accepted by everyone.
>
>
>
> Sources:
>
> * The Klingon Hamlet
> * ghIlghameS / Gilgamesh.
> * The Grammarian's Desk
> * Much Ado About Nothing / paghmo' tIn mIS
> * jatmey
> * Qo'noS QonoS
> * KLI Friend of Maltz certificate
>
>
>
>
>
> Level 3
>
> Words, phrases or grammar that were indirectly devised or authorised
> by
> Okrand. This includes novels where Okrand collaborated with the
> authors.
> Material is generally accepted where typographical errors have been
> corrected. Some purists will not accept this material as canon.
>
>
>
> Sources:
>
> * DI: Diplomatic Implausibility
> * The Art of the Impossible
> * BH: Klingon Empire: A Burning House
> * other KRAD novels?
> * Sarek
>
>
>
>
>
> Level 4
>
> Words, phrases or grammar that were directly devised or authorised by
> Okrand. This material, excluding the odd mistake, is accepted as
> canon by
> everyone.
>
>
>
> Sources:
>
> * BoP / KBOP: Klingon Bird of Prey poster
> * CK: Conversational Klingon
> * KGT: Klingon for the Galactic Traveler
> * PK; Power Klingon
> * TKD: The Klingon Dictionary
> * TKW: The Klingon Way
> * HQ: Articles in HolQeD written by Okrand
> * ST1 - ST10, with ST11 due: Words spoken in various Star Trek films
> * KLS: Former Paramount web site - Star Trek Continuum: Klingon
> Linguistic Studies
> * SkyBox Trading Cards
> * Hallmark card (is there a image posted anywhere?)
> * KCD:
> * st.klingon
> * msn.onstage.startrek.expert.okrand
> * Radio Times article
> * Federation Travel Guide
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>