tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Apr 28 10:41:00 1998
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: Correct me if I'm wrong but..
- From: "William H. Martin" <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: Correct me if I'm wrong but..
- Date: Tue, 28 Apr 1998 13:40:55 -0400 (EDT)
- In-Reply-To: <[email protected]> from "Robyn Stewart" at Apr 27, 98 03:23:01 pm
According to Robyn Stewart:
...
> In answer to the question about talking computers, I think using -lI'
> and -pu' noun suffixes with them would sound affected, like me using
> a gentle tone and a pat on the case to coax my HP LaserJet III to
> print just one more copy before it jams again. It would be as if
> the person didn't know it was just a program. Remember the episode
> Measure of a Man, when the scientist wanted to deactivate Data for
> study, and kept calling him "it"? If the episode were in Klingon,
> the scientist might have referred to him as {la'raj} instead of
> {la'ra'} to depersonalize him the same way.
Here I disagree. Data's language capabilites are so obvious
that referring to him as {la'raj} would be exactly the same as
refering to Riker as {la'raj}. Sentience is not the issue.
Machine vs. organic flesh is not the issue.
One may question a simpler computer's ability to really USE
langauge. Our current computers, even when they can read text
aloud or write what we say into a microphone or respond in AI
programs that attempt to offer theraputic sessions -- all of
these may very well have dubious claims to being able to USE
langauge such that they deserve the gender of "beings capable
of using language". Data is not in that class. Neither is the
Enterprise's computer. These beings definitely use language.
Meanwhile, I've never heard a Klingon computer speak. They seem
to listen, but they don't seem to speak. Likely, a Klingon
computer would not be considered capable of using language.
> - Qov
charghwI'