tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Jul 08 05:18:51 1996
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: mu'mey chu'... (was Re: KLBC)
- From: Will Martin <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: mu'mey chu'... (was Re: KLBC)
- Date: Mon, 8 Jul 1996 08:18:43 -0400 ()
- Priority: NORMAL
On Sat, 6 Jul 1996 16:28:04 -0700 [email protected]
wrote:
> In a message dated 96-07-05 17:44:05 EDT, voragh
writes:
>
> >mu' chu'!? majQa'!
> >
> >Where did this appear? I thought I had relentlessly recorded all of MO's
> >post-TKD vocabulary. Did I miss this? What other words were "revealed"
> >by Maltz at that time?
>
> Words have trickled in. I don't even know where I have discovered them all.
> Do you have regh, lIw, 'uch, bey'?
This is exactly why we need to annotate the source of our
vocabularies. Otherwise, you have no way of telling the
difference between an Okrandian word introduced by an
audiotape, a trading card, an interview or book, or a
totally invalid word like the extended family terms
Proechel made up. If we just pass around words we picked up
with no sense of their source, we'll wind up with
differing, corrupted word lists.
While you are at it, you might as well become good
lexicographers and note things like whether a verb is used
transitively or intransitively, or if it is translated with
some new synonym in a canon source. After all, Okrand has
little more to work with from Maltz than we do from Okrand.
{{:)>
> peHruS