On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 1:51 AM, Lieven <levinius@gmx.de> wrote:
Am 11.08.2017 um 04:28 schrieb nIqolay Q:
One of the major differences between Discovery and Klingon Hamlet is that Discovery is going to be Actual Star Trek Canon.
There's the point: it's "Star Trek" canon, but still not pour Okrandian canon. Remember all the gibberish we'se seen on Deep Space nine? That certainly is canon, but wo don't even understand a word from it.
The argument I'm making is that the reason we don't understand the gibberish from DS9 and elsewhere is because it is supposed to be considered canonically *no' Hol*, even the stuff that (coincidentally, I'm sure) sounds like someone doing a bad phonetic reading of modern Klingon words. The section on *no' Hol* (KGT p. 11-14) is written as if it's trying to reassure the reader that even if a Klingon says something that sounds like gibberish, it's actually perfectly acceptible as a contemporary use of ancient language. Okrand doesn't mention many examples of TV show gibberish specifically (though *mova' 'aqI' ruStaq* (KGT p. 13) is a line from "Looking For Par'Mach in All The Wrong Places" (DS9)), but it seems clear to me in retrospect that the digression on *no' Hol *was intended as a way to include all the TV gibberish in the canonical linguistic history without having to really make sense of it. Which is why I said earlier that all the stuff we've seen on TV and film has been incorporated into canonical Klingon, even if just as a more ancient form of the language.