[1384] in tlhIngan-Hol
how canonical are the veS QonoS words?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU)
Fri Aug 20 10:32:49 1993
Reply-To: "Klingon Language List" <tlhIngan-Hol@village.boston.ma.us>
From: (Mark E. Shoulson) <shoulson@ctr.columbia.edu>
To: "Klingon Language List" <tlhIngan-Hol@village.boston.ma.us>
Date: Mon, 26 Jul 93 10:33:39 -0400
In-Reply-To: Erich Schneider's message of Fri, 23 Jul 93 17:24:46 CDT <93072322
24.AA12836@ bush.cs.tamu.edu>
>From: erich@bush.cs.tamu.edu (Erich Schneider)
>Date: Fri, 23 Jul 93 17:24:46 CDT
>Content-Length: 147
>Subject line says it all. How canonical can we consider these words?
>Are they all Okrand-approved(tm)?
I don't have the HolQeD with me, so I can't say for certain the status of
veS QonoS, but as I recall, it was put out with Okrand's OK, and the words
in particular came from Okrand and not someone else. Note that some of
them found their way into TKD 2nd edition. So they *are* Okrand's words,
and thus presumable canonical, but they may have some apocryphal side too,
since after all they don't appear in the canonical workd (TKD, CK) and are
likely to be confusing to new readers. Caveat emptor.
>-QumpIn 'avrIn pIH
> erich@bush.cs.tamu.edu
~mark
