[96980] in tlhIngan-Hol
Re: [Tlhingan-hol] Canon?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (David Trimboli)
Wed Aug 21 16:56:23 2013
Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2013 16:55:44 -0400
From: David Trimboli <david@trimboli.name>
To: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
In-Reply-To: <CA+7zAmMXGq3Cvekzd+zQ42z2dXBao240cX_84cNikZmNSqHBaA@mail.gmail.com>
Errors-To: tlhingan-hol-bounces@kli.org
On 8/21/2013 4:44 PM, De'vID wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 10:18 PM, Fiat Knox <fiat_knox@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>> For a time, I found myself asking whether there was a Klingon term for
>> "canon."
>>
>> Then I thought: use {mub} legal, be legal (v) for canon and {Hat} illegal,
>> be illegal (v) for non-canon.
>>
>> Does that work for anyone else?
>
> Canon has to do with more than just legality though: it has to do with
> the existence of a {chovnatlh'a'}.
Yes, "canon" refers to the body of sources that is considered authentic
or authoritative. Something that is "non-canon" is not illegal; it's
just not accepted as a genuine part of that body.
--
SuStel
http://www.trimboli.name/
_______________________________________________
Tlhingan-hol mailing list
Tlhingan-hol@kli.org
http://stodi.digitalkingdom.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol
