tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sat Aug 03 14:07:20 1996
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Cautions and Perspectives (WAS: An offer you shouldn't refuse!)
- From: "Dr. Lawrence M. Schoen" <[email protected]>
- Subject: Cautions and Perspectives (WAS: An offer you shouldn't refuse!)
- Date: Sat, 3 Aug 1996 14:07:20 -0700
David Trimboli wrote:
> >I think this usage of {-Daq} only makes sense because one will see the idiom
> >in it. You say the phrase "believe in" is used in all Indo-European
> >languages. Well then, what about, say, Japanese? Suppose someone who spoke
> >Japanese learned Klingon.
And Ken Traft replied:
> Perhaps the issue you make is valid and definitely gives credence to the fact
> that not all languages follow the same rules. And as we have seen many times
> in Klingon this is true as well. The fact that there are similarities and
> that there is some consistency in most languages does give us cause to
> speculate.
And here's where I jump in with both feet:
Ken, pause a moment and look at your last sentence above. This is where you
(and often Glen) get into trouble by overgeneralizing. That something happens
to hold true for many (hey, maybe even all) the languages in a given language
family (in this case Indo-European) is a looooong cry from justifying the
implications when you say "most languages."
Glen and I have gone around and around on a number of points, with him pointing
out numerous examples from many different Indo-European languages and my
responding that such a thing is not really a compelling argument because Klingon
is not Indo-European. Likewise, if I were to take another language family (oh,
say Uto-Aztecan) and *not* find a parallel to something in Klingon, that
wouldn't prove anything either.
This difference in perspective may well stem from different approaches. Someone
who studies a number of languages (e.g., a philologist or a polyglot) would
presumably approach a new language in terms of the ways it is similar and/or
different from the languages of his/her experience. This makes a lot of sense
and gives you a huge advantage over someone who has no foreign language
experience.
On the other hand, someone who studies the structure and patterns of language
overall (e.g., a linguist or psycholinguist) operates under a less restrictive
set of constraints and is free to notice novel patterns that would be literally
inconceivable to someone versed in a specific set of languages. The downside is
that this view is much more abstract, which becomes a liability if you're
looking for something concrete.
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:: Dr Lawrence M Schoen, Director :: The KLI is a nonprofit ::
:: The Klingon Language Institute :: tax exempt corporation ::
:: POB 634, Flourtown, PA 19031 USA :: DaH HuchlIj'e' ghonob ::
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:: [email protected] :: http://www.kli.org :: 215/836-4955 ::
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::