[Tlhingan-hol] mu' mung

[Felix Malmenbeck]

Only "Diplomatic Implausability" was vetted by Okrand. Source: https://twitter.com/#!/KRADeC/status/91641513691459584
[Marc also said something to the same effect at qepHom wa'maHDIch]

There was, however, one instance where Marc translated "khrun" as 'IHrun, but changed it to Hun after learning DeCandido had used it.

> *{Hestlh'ng} which doesn't even fit the orthography.

Borrowed from Klingonaase: khest'n
Very strange rendering, though; I'd probably have gone with *QeStIn or *QeSten, or even just *Qet'en.
________________________________________
From: De'vID jonpIn [de.vid.jonpin at gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, March 15, 2012 17:42
To: tlhIngan-Hol
Subject: Re: [Tlhingan-hol] mu' mung

De'vID:
>> {ghojmoHwI'} n. teacher, mentor [obvious extension of {ghojmoH} from
>> TKD, but does this appear as its own word in canon?]

loghaD:
> Used in "Diplomatic Implausability"; approved by Okrand.

De'vID:
>> {ma' to'vor} n. Mauk-to'Vor ritual

loghaD:
> Same as above.

Is everything in "Diplomatic Implausibility" vetted by MO?  What about
other DeCandido works with glossaries, are those words approved too?

For example, here is the glossary to "A Good Day to Die":
http://books.google.com/books?id=nRuva4zrxFIC&lpg=PA284&dq=Habnagh&hl=sv&pg=PA281#v=onepage&q&f=false

Here's the one to "Diplomatic Implausibility":
http://books.google.com/books?id=tikiYLYOadcC&lpg=PP1&dq=Diplomatic%20Implausibility&hl=sv&pg=PA244#v=onepage&q&f=false

"A Burning House":
http://books.google.com/books?id=YlMTihkejQUC&lpg=PT410&hl=sv&pg=PT403#v=onepage&q&f=false

"Enemy Territory" also apparently has a glossary, but I couldn't find
it online.  I did find this reference to it:
http://klingon.livejournal.com/56112.html

There are a bunch of {tlhIngan Hol} words in the above that I've never
seen elsewhere, such as {'aDanjI'}, {chuSwI'}, {Da'ar}, {Habnagh},
{HurqIq}, {ghInaq}, {ghonglIq}, {jInjoq}, {qaDrav}, {qorvIt},{ramjep}
(a type of bird), {So'HIp}, {tlhInja}, {tlhongaD}.  There's also
*{Hestlh'ng} which doesn't even fit the orthography.

Also, what I have noted as {ma'veq} is there written as *{mevaq}, but
it's apparently intended to be the same word.  Ditto for *{ma'Do'vor}
instead of {ma'to'vor}, *{parmaHay} for {parmaqqay}.

What's the canonicity of these words?

--
De'vID

_______________________________________________
Tlhingan-hol mailing list
Tlhingan-hol at stodi.digitalkingdom.org
http://stodi.digitalkingdom.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol