tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri Feb 13 12:07:57 1998
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: introduction
ghItlh Qermaq
> Qermaq bravely throws himself into the fire...
>
> charghwI'vaD ghItlh Doneq:
>
> >Then, what is your problem with my "r" being pronounced in the back
> >of my mouth, instead of in front with the tip of my tongue?
> >
> >In a previous post (which I unfornunately have deleated already), you
> >said you wouldn't be able to understand me if I did so, that you
> >wouldn't be able to distinguish between my Klingon "r" and Klingon
> >"gh". And now you are contradicting yourself?
>
> I think the situation is one of confusion, not conflict. Anyone, including
> charghwI', will understand your spoken Dutch and your spoken Klingon if you
> share a fluency which will enable them to understand your spoken language.
> If a person grew up three houses away from you, they will likely share your
> dialect, pronunciation, etc., which would on occasion be barriers to
> communication for speakers in different continents.
>
> If you speak a language perfectly, and another person understands the
> language perfectly, there's no barrier. But if a person is not sufficiently
> familiar with a language to differentiate among sounds which are similar
> enough to seem like the same sound in their native language, then there
> might be confusion.
>
> If a raw beginner to Dutch (a native English speaker, perhaps) heard the
> words 'keuken' and 'kuiken', they might, short of contextual cues, mistake
> one for the other. If an intermediate student of Klingon heard a Dutch
> back-r at the beginning and end of <ghogh>, there might be confusion - they
> might not hear it as a Klingon word, since it is a foreign sound followed by
> a fairly universal vowel followed by a foreign sound.
>
> I assume you pronounce Klingon <r> similarly to the Dutch front-r your
> mother uses. That is likely a good pronunciation. I also get the impression
> you use the Dutch back-r as the Klingon <gh>. This is incorrect
> pronunciation. (I'll use a capital R to indicate Dutch back-r - the growled
> uvular variety.) Do you say the Klingon word for 'hand' as <Rop>? Or do you
> put that sound in the rear of the oral cavity, out of the throat, and say
> <ghop>?
Well, I don't use the front "r", because my mother *doesn't* use it -
confusion indeed :). She couldn't pronounce it at first, just like
me, but she learnt it later on, and demonstrates it occasionally -
just for fun.
Next, I don't use a "R" for the Klingon "gh" either. I use a "gh" as
I heard Okrand use it on the tapes.
This brings me to what I think is the main problem. Dutch has a "gh"
like Klingon, in fact it has two. One, which is most similar to the Klingon
"gh", is usually used in the north of the country. This one is called
a "hard" g. The other one, the "soft" g, which is very smooth, is
usually used in the southern part - that's where I live. The two are
interchangeable: the Dutch "g" can be pronounced either way. They are
not separate letters, but rather the same one but differently
pronounced in dialect.
Well, since I am used to a "soft" g, and Klingon uses a "hard" one, I
wrote (obviously to the confusion of everyone on this list,
especially charghwI') "ghrarghr" as an example of how I pronounce the
Klingon word {ghargh}. The "ghr"-part represented a hard g, to
distinguish it from my soft g which probably noone here knows. Now, I
realise that it may have been better not to do that.
The only sound that I mispronounce (that I know of, at least) is the
Klingon "r": I pronounce as "R". If you insist, I will practice
using a trilled "r", but right now I am unable to produce one and
that's why I make an "R".
charghwI' pointed out that it is extremely difficult to go from a
trilled "r" to a "gh" (as in his own name). I don't find this
difficult at all, because I use the back-"R". Both "R" and "gh" are
produced in the back of the mouth. But that does *not* mean that they
sound more or less alike. Klingon words {ghop} and {rop} do not sound
alike - the only thing is, that I pronounce the latter as "Rop".
> Consider <tlhoS>. Say you think, "<tlh> is similar to \kl\ so I'll pronounce
> it that way. And <S> is similar to \s\ so I'll pronounce it that way too."
> You'll say the word <tlhoS> and it'll sound just like English "close"
> (nearby or not far). That is not close at all. It is wrong. It is equally
> wrong to use R for <gh>. It is incorrect pronunciation.
I know it's wrong, and that's why I don't do it. I don't use R for
gh. I use R for r. I know that's wrong too, but I can't help it. It's
the closest I can come.
> If I spoke Dutch (which I don't) and said 'keuken' and 'kuiken' exactly the
> same way, you'd think "Stupid American, can't pronounce the language." You'd
> be at least partly right. But that is exactly what happens when you use R
> for <gh>. Perhaps charghwI' thought you would use R for <r> as well - I am
> assuming a lot here, including the assumption that you do not. Clue us in on
> what exactly you do.
Well, you have been able to read this above.
> For the record, here's my mental map of these sounds. <gh> - like the ch of
> German ich, but voiced; also like English \g\ but elongated. (The
> Merriam-Webster Dictionary uses an underlined \k\ to notate the sound which
> resembles <H> - <gh> would then be an underlined \g\.) <r> is the same as
> the non-initial r in Spanish, and likely is similar to the front-r in many
> European languages. Neither involve the uvula in any way. The only Klingon
> sounds which do are <q> and <Q>.
>
> Qermaq
I will listen again to at least one of the tapes this weekend, to hear
what Okrand does. If I notice something in his pronounciation which I
do wrong, I will try to correct myself.
I hope I have made my point clear. If not, ask me, so we can end this
discussion.
/Doneq
______
ghojwI'pu'lI' tISaH