[110546] in tlhIngan-Hol
Re: [tlhIngan Hol] Is Star Trek: Discovery a new canon category?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (nIqolay Q)
Fri Aug 11 09:25:46 2017
X-Original-To: tlhingan-hol@lists.kli.org
In-Reply-To: <CA+7zAmM+D4uJdgXSC0YEcD+QE__oRZgsRga6Rfg44kO3Kk47Ow@mail.gmail.com>
From: nIqolay Q <niqolay0@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2017 09:25:43 -0400
To: "tlhingan-hol@kli.org" <tlhingan-hol@kli.org>
Reply-To: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
Errors-To: tlhingan-hol-bounces@lists.kli.org
--===============7676649558185460211==
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="94eb2c05a38408c3da05567a4056"
--94eb2c05a38408c3da05567a4056
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 9:22 AM, De'vID <de.vid.jonpin@gmail.com> wrote:
> Perhaps I asked the wrong question. I don't necessarily consider
> Klingon from DSC to be Okrandian canonical Klingon until Okrand
> retroactively blesses it, but I'm going to (unless someone persuades
> me otherwise) include them in {boQwI'} anyway before he does so. I
> suppose the question really is, does anyone have a serious objection
> to {boQwI'} containing both Okrandian canon and good Klingon which
> conforms to Okrandian Klingon but which isn't from Okrand? Such
> entries will of course be marked as having come from DSC.
> <http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org>
>
It already does, though. The entry for {taH pagh taHbe'} contains the whole
translation of the soliloquy; has anyone ever complained about that?
--94eb2c05a38408c3da05567a4056
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"ltr"><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On F=
ri, Aug 11, 2017 at 9:22 AM, De'vID <span dir=3D"ltr"><<a href=3D"ma=
ilto:de.vid.jonpin@gmail.com" target=3D"_blank">de.vid.jonpin@gmail.com</a>=
></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px=
0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
Perhaps I asked the wrong question. I don't necessarily consider<br>
Klingon from DSC to be Okrandian canonical Klingon until Okrand<br>
retroactively blesses it, but I'm going to (unless someone persuades<br=
>
me otherwise) include them in {boQwI'} anyway before he does so. I<br>
suppose the question really is, does anyone have a serious objection<br>
to {boQwI'} containing both Okrandian canon and good Klingon which<br>
conforms to Okrandian Klingon but which isn't from Okrand? Such<br>
entries will of course be marked as having come from DSC.<div class=3D"gmai=
l-HOEnZb"><div class=3D"gmail-h5"><a href=3D"http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.=
cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org" rel=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blank"></a></div></=
div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>It already does, though. The entry for=
{taH pagh taHbe'} contains the whole translation of the soliloquy; has=
anyone ever complained about that?<br></div></div><br></div></div>
--94eb2c05a38408c3da05567a4056--
--===============7676649558185460211==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
_______________________________________________
tlhIngan-Hol mailing list
tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org
http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org
--===============7676649558185460211==--
