At 12:47 '?????' 6/17/2012, ghunchu'wI' wrote:
On Jun 17, 2012, at 11:18 AM, David Trimboli <[email protected]> wrote:It's not clear to me why you're so reluctant to treat the content of the paq'batlh narrative as examples of correct grammar.
Hey *I'm* suspicious of the paq'batlh. It's a chunk of Klingon text part of which was written by Marc Okrand, but we don't know which parts, and all of which was presumably read carefully by him. I've certainly seen the errors that get by when I proofread something, and I'm not having to pause to look up words and probably affixes the way Marc would be. It's easy to be expecting something to say something and to see what you expected. It's easy to say, "yup that sounds okay," especially when you have a high regard for the skills of the person who wrote it.
We know that a number of basic errors got by that process, because we corrected some. We know that more got by, because a number of people, I think 'ISqu' is one, have catalogued them. And I'm unhappy with the process by which we edited that document and I was there. I wish we'd had more time. I wish each side of the table had done all the pages, rather than splitting them up so we'd have a double check. I was trying to read the Klingon without reading the English so that I would read it to see if it made sense, as opposed to being lulled into thinking, "yup that means that." I kind of did that half and half, because I also needed to check the English to make sure that it meant what it was supposed to mean, as well as making sense.
- Qov
_______________________________________________ Tlhingan-hol mailing list [email protected] http://stodi.digitalkingdom.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol