tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Nov 30 13:00:59 2009

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: Double negatives

David Trimboli ( [KLI Member] [Hol po'wI']

Christopher Doty wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 11:45, ghunchu'wI' 'utlh <> wrote:
>> There's also {yIH vIHIjbe'} "I'm not transporting tribbles." It
>> doesn't mean you are doing something to tribbles called "not
>> transporting". It means you're not "transporting tribbles".
> Then Okrand is wrong when he says that <-be'> negates what immediately
> precedes it?

I missed this part on my last message. I think it's just another 
indication that Klingon as presented by Okrand isn't quite as black and 
white as you deem it to be. TKD gives us the basic rules only. We 
sometimes learn more complicated rules. Sometimes we learn about 
individual exceptions. New rules seem to blatantly contradict 
established examples. But we never get anything that says "This is 
absolutely the only way this works; don't even bother questioning it."

tlhIngan Hol MUSH

Back to archive top level