tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Aug 19 22:37:21 1997
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: Some more jokes in KGT
ja' Lawrence:
>I was talking with Marc about this yesterday. I mentioned that the only
>problem with the bachHa' error in the book was that it was, by
>definition, canonical.
It's canonical, but it can still be an error. We understand that the
{-egh} and {gar} problems in TKD are typographical errors, and don't
represent the information correctly. We recognize that {cha'maH wa'
vatlh rep} for noon (1200 hours) is a mistake, even if it is from a
canonical source. We know {Qaw'} "destroy" is probably not a noun,
even if it's listed as one -- twice -- in the dictionary.
Canonical error isn't really a problem.
>I could hear him smiling over the phone as he said, "but that's only in
>the English to Klingon side. It's correct the other way."
Mislabeling {bachHa'} as a noun is an obvious mistake; nobody is going
to try to use it that way. That it's an "intentional error" only makes
us grin and/or groan...
-- ghunchu'wI'