tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sun Apr 16 15:53:50 2006

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

• Index by Date
• Index by Thread
• Index by Author

Re: Why we can use words that it'd take klingons 5 minutes to understand.

Alan Anderson ([email protected])

• From: Alan Anderson <[email protected]>
• Subject: Re: Why we can use words that it'd take klingons 5 minutes to understand.
• Date: Sun, 16 Apr 2006 18:54:15 -0400
• In-reply-to: <[email protected]>
• References: <[email protected]>

ja' Shane MiQogh:

>   So why is it [pung ghap HoS] considered part of the reputable  
> klingon cannon?

It is part of the canon because it is verified as having been written  
by Marc Okrand (and correctly printed by the book's publisher).  As a  
proverb, it is a valid example of Klingon language as it should be  
used.  As a sentence, however, it is not a valid example of proper  
Klingon grammar, and it should not be used as a pattern for other  
sentences.  Think of it as analogous to "...til death do us part."   
It uses ancient grammar which is no longer valid in other contexts.   
It is a fossilized phrase which everyone understands regardless of  
the dubious phrasing.

[By the way, the word is spelled *canon*.  Look it up.]

-- ghunchu'wI'

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Why we can use words that it'd take klingons 5 minutes to understand.
    • From: Shane MiQogh <[email protected]>

• References:
  • Re: Why we can use words that it'd take klingons 5 minutes to understand.
    • From: Shane MiQogh <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: ngawDeq
• Next by Date: Re: Why we can use words that it'd take klingons 5 minutes to understand.
• Previous by thread: Re: Why we can use words that it'd take klingons 5 minutes to understand.
• Next by thread: Re: Why we can use words that it'd take klingons 5 minutes to understand.
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread
  • Author

Back to archive top level