[87315] in tlhIngan-Hol
RE: Double negatives
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Steven Boozer)
Mon Nov 30 16:10:19 2009
From: Steven Boozer <sboozer@uchicago.edu>
To: "'tlhingan-hol@kli.org'" <tlhingan-hol@kli.org>
Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2009 15:08:11 -0600
In-Reply-To: <4B143230.5030202@trimboli.name>
Errors-to: tlhingan-hol-bounce@kli.org
Reply-to: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
Christopher Doty wrote:
>> Then Okrand is wrong when he says that <-be'> negates what immediately
>> precedes it?
SuStel:
>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<
--
Voragh
Canon Master of the Klingons
