tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sat May 22 06:39:19 2004

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: paghHu'/paghleS

David Trimboli ([email protected]) [KLI Member] [Hol po'wI']

From: <[email protected]>

> In a message dated 2004-05-21 10:37:27 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
> [email protected] writes:
>
> > Not every possible construction is productive.
>
> I take the position that EVERY possible construction is productive.  The
> language must have a means for expanding without resorting to canon and
Okrand for
> every little detail.  Granted, the meanings of phrases like {paghHu'} are
not
> attested in canon.  But the words are possible, and now there is a
reasonable
> meaning for them.


Because YOU gave them one?  Hello?  You have no authority to give meaning to
Klingon words you make up.  I do not accept your proposal, and I do not
accept your logic.

Woo hoo!  Let's make things up!!  I declare, officially and permanently,
that {'ughabugha} is the real, immutable, and only way to say "have an
nflated ego."  And the reason this makes sense is because Klingon
chronometers, struggling to decide whether they're using a ternary counting
system or base 10, make funny noises as they display the time.  That's
completely logical; you can't dispute it.  Wow!  This language is great!  We
can do anything we want!  {bI'ughabugha! bI'ughabugha!}  Hey, you can't say
that I'm wrong.  As a former Beginners' Grammarian, member of the KLI in
good standing, and someone who's been using Klingon a lot longer than you, I
declare your rule to be bogus.  Yes!  The power!  I can do anything!
Muahahahaaaa!

Please.

SuStel
Stardate 4390.3

Back to archive top level