tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Feb 15 21:18:41 1994

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]


     I'd like to explain that in my opinion that verbs that appear in TKD
with "be" in their definitions are the ONLY verbs that can be used
adjectivally, I am not basing my argument on any universal interpretation of
symantics. TKD was written by one person. There is a strong pattern in the
definitions as stated in TKD, that one group of verbs has "be" in their
definitions and all others do not.

     If you manually type in all the definitions in the dictionary, you will
quickly discover this pattern. As I have done (as yet incomplete) this, I
also have jumped back and forth between Klingon to English and English to
Klingon sides, to catch any missing words (there are several), and in doing
so, this "be" trait becomes even more obvious. There is a pattern to the way
these definitions are given which is different from the pattern of all other
verbs. These words are clearly different.

     Whether Nick or anybody else considers the existence of "be" in a
dictionary definition to be significant is less important than whether OKRAND
thought "be" was significant in HIS dictionary, after all. It is the ONLY
dictionary of Klingon, and if there is no significance to the word "be" in a
definition, then why bother with this kind of pattern when spelling out the


Back to archive top level