tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sun Jan 30 11:51:08 2000
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: klingon abbreviations
- From: [email protected]
- Subject: Re: klingon abbreviations
- Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2000 14:50:39 EST
In a message dated 1/30/00 12:14:05 PM Central Standard Time,
[email protected] writes:
> > I vote no on abbreviations.
> > lay'tel SIvten
>
> jIQochbe'. <*lj> vIlaDtaHvIS, vIyajbe'. tup puS poH jIQub vaj jIyaj.
>
> I second that vote. If you can use a relative beginner's observation:
> When I saw <*lj> it took me a while to figure out. I didn't want to
> ask about it because having been on the list for a short time, I
> didn't know if it was accepted usage, though it was the first time
> I saw it. I am glad that it isn't a convention (yet). I think it
> might be enough to discourage a beginner to see "words" they can't
> find in the dictionary and word lists.
>
I wrote the {lj}. All I can say is, that piece wasn't written with beginners
in mind. The text was fairly complex, and it didn't include an SKI. The
{lj} was a sort of joke for mature readers. I didn't mean to be proposing
a new "word". Sorry if you didn't get the joke, but not everything on this
list is intended for everyone.
-- ter'eS
http://www.geocities.com/teresh_2000
http://www.geocities.com/weseb_2000