tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Nov 30 13:09:12 2009
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
RE: Double negatives
Steven Boozer (email@example.com)
Christopher Doty wrote:
>> Then Okrand is wrong when he says that <-be'> negates what immediately
>> precedes it?
>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."
A cynic might say that Okrand avoids such categorical statements in order to give himself a loophole should he ever need one! <g<
Canon Master of the Klingons