[tlhIngan Hol] missing words from kli's "new words not in the original lexicon"

De'vID de.vid.jonpin at gmail.com
Tue Oct 29 11:06:27 PDT 2019


On Fri, 25 Oct 2019 at 15:08, David Holt <kenjutsuka at live.com> wrote:

> > Even as a borrowing, since it's Ca'Non, I think it should be included
> too.
> > As far as the {qabpaq} is concerned, I'm copying-pasting from my notes:
> > "From an untranslated FaceBook post from Okrand to Andre (2/11/2014)
> discussing Burmese languages:
> >  Do'Ha' QIp qabpaqwIj. [bama/mIyanma] Hol mu'mey cha'be'. mI'mey neH
> cha'."
>
> I wouldn't count that as canon.  Is Dr. Okrand never allowed to just have
> a casual conversation without being careful that he is also making an
> offical canon pronouncement?  So Dr. Okrand occaionally uses mu'mey ru' and
> mu'mey ghoQ.  That doesn't make those words canon, it shows us that it's OK
> to use mu'mey ru' and mu'mey ghoQ.
>

That reminds me of an incident at Saarbrücken qepHom 2011. Okrand was
making an announcement about the paq'batlh, and at the end he exclaimed,
{pItlh!} Then someone reminded him of something, and he said, "Oh,
*{pItlhbe'}?" People started chanting {mu' chu'!} to which Okrand laughed
and said/gestured "no".

I don't think *{pItlhbe'} belongs in a dictionary or word list, even though
Okrand did say it, because he was obviously joking.

-- 
De'vID
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.kli.org/pipermail/tlhingan-hol-kli.org/attachments/20191029/60f13dd6/attachment.html>


More information about the tlhIngan-Hol mailing list