[Tlhingan-hol] Canon?

[David Trimboli]

On 8/21/2013 4:44 PM, De'vID wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 10:18 PM, Fiat Knox <fiat_knox at 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/