tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Thu Oct 29 11:08:16 2009

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: intuition and grammar (was Re: Ditransitive reflexives)

clpachucki (

Yes, but if there's a problem, we need to fix it.  It would only be the smart, right, and beneficial thing to do.  Fill the hole! 
fellow yellow jello marshMELLO 

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Steven Lytle" <> 
Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2009 8:49:22 PM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern 
Subject: Re: intuition and grammar (was Re: Ditransitive reflexives) 

It's safer to walk around a hole than to jump in. We don't know how deep the 
holes are, and they're difficult to illuminate. 
lay'tel SIvten 

On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 7:56 AM, ghunchu'wI' <> wrote: 

> On Oct 28, 2009, at 3:48 AM, eric mead wrote: 
> > And that actually brings me to my larger question. What happens in 
> > the culture of tlhIngan Hol if there is found an area of the 
> > grammar that seems problematic and/or just missing and the fluent 
> > speakers have an intuition (generally agreed upon) about it?? Does 
> > that become another resource? Or are speakers not 'allowed' to add 
> > their own intuitions to the grammar? 
> Speakers can use whatever intuition or pet theories or personal 
> preferences they want.  However, nobody here has the authority to add 
> anything to the grammar.  If what someone says makes sense, others 
> are free to adopt its use as well.  If it isn't in conflict with the 
> officially published rules of the language, it might even become 
> widely popular.  Even so, there will usually be some who are more 
> conservative and resist trendy things until and unless they are 
> sanctioned by Marc Okrand. 
> The basic goal is for someone to be able to learn Klingon well using 
> only the published books as a resource.  Where there's a hole in the 
> grammar (e.g. subjunctive), the basic advice is to avoid it, not to 
> fill it. 
> -- ghunchu'wI' 

Back to archive top level