lieven:
Theoretically, if ALL that Qov has translated is just fine, following the grammar, with no confusion - then why should we not show it?
In that case I want to ask, to include in boQwI' every other sentence every other grammarian has ever written. If we note at the end of the entry "written by grammarian x, at that date and instance", then there isn't a problem, right ? Speaking for myself, I trust SuStel and lojmIt tI'wI' nuv more than Qov. So, why include her sentences and exclude theirs, or yours ? You're a grammarian, right ? Why should I study Qov's sentences, and not yours ? See my point ? The moment we accept anyone else's sentences as "material which should be studied", then we place ourselves on a slippery path. qunnoq On 11 Aug 2017 4:53 pm, "Lieven" <levinius@gmx.de> wrote: Am 11.08.2017 um 15:40 schrieb mayqel qunenoS:
If you do include DSC non-okrand sentences for beginners, then these are the same beginners who will be confused, if and when okrand disqualifies something written in those sentences.
All of this is just speculation, since we do not know the phrases yet. De'vID is right that people may search for what they heard on the show. Theoretically, if ALL that Qov has translated is just fine, following the grammar, with no confusion - then why should we not show it? The note that it's not canon from Okrand may still be added. And besides, boQwI' has the option to add notes saying what is incorrect - it even does with canon examples that have mistakes. -- Lieven L. Litaer aka Quvar valer 'utlh Grammarian of the KLI http://www.facebook.com/Klingonteacher http://www.klingonwiki.net _______________________________________________ tlhIngan-Hol mailing list tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org