tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Apr 16 17:02:48 2008

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]

Re: cha' Hol ngeb mu'ghommey Daj vItu'pu'!

Mark J. Reed ([email protected]) [KLI Member] 

Even in Tolkien's notes the languages aren't fully developed.  We have
at most snippets of ideas, and those ideas were constantly in flux, so
the notes are frequently self-contradictory.  I would expect any
not-yet-published material to contribute to the confusion rather than
resolving it, unfortunately.



On 4/16/08, Sangqar <[email protected]> wrote:
> > The whole term "artificial language" is strange, since all languages
> > are artificial in that they are made up by human beings. What we
> > really mean by the term is that it is a language created by one adult
> > rather than by a large number of children, as "natural" languages are.
> > "Constructed" languages fit the same description. The thing that sets
> > it apart from natural language is the age and number of people who
> > invent and evolve the language.
>
> The Esperanto community is similarly touchy about the phrase "artificial
> language", preferring (almost violently) the term "planned language. As
> I see it, is is simply a convenient handle to distinguish such languages
> from "natural languages", which evolved over hundreds or thousands of
> years from a complete community (NOT just children - adults as well
> contribute to the evolution of a natural language).
>
> > Meanwhile, I see "imaginary" language as something quite different. I
> > think of an imaginary language as a language that does not really
> > exist. Perhaps the adult who thought it up lacked the time or skill to
> > make up a whole language, but he did bother to name it and maybe come
> > up with a few words and a few ideas about grammar to describe the
> > language and give those who read about it something to, well,
> > "imagine" in terms of what the language would be like, if someone were
> > actually able to speak it.
>
> Vulcan, for example, is an imaginary language (unless Paramount has
> hired an Okrand to change that). Klingon was also, until Paramount hired
> someone to turn it into a real one.
>
> > An imaginary language can be thought about, and its few phrases can be
> > memorized and repeated, but it lacks sufficient vocabulary and grammar
> > to say much more than the language's inventor has already said. A
> > constructed language provides the tools to allow others to express new
> > communication that no one has ever expressed before. For example, I'm
> > pretty certain that Marc Okrand has never said, {ghItlhwI'mey law'
> > ngaS HIvje'wIj SuD.} Meanwhile, aside from the vagaries of Klingon's
> > coloring system, the vast majority of Klingon speakers can figure out
> > what I just said. I could add more specificity to the color by adding
> > {bIQ'a' rur HIvje'vam.} You can't come up with many original Elvish
> > statements that don't already exist in Tolkien canon.
> >
> > I think of the Tolkien languages as imaginary languages. I mean,
> > wouldn't it be cool if someone could actually speak the language of
> > Tolkien's elves? I don't mean just someone who can pronounce the few
> > words Tolkien wrote in the language or who can go through his notes
> > and know all the descriptions of the language features and what
> > natural languages it is based upon, etc. I mean someone who could say,
> > in the language, "I walked five miles to get here. I'm hungry. Could
> > you pass me that loaf of bread? And could you pour me some water while
> > you are at it?" It would be okay to substitute something for "mile" or
> > "loaf of bread", given that it might not be in the vocabulary, but
> > certainly any language ought to be able to express something close to
> > that kind of thing, unless, of course, the language is imaginary,
> > which is another way of saying "incomplete".
>
> Actually, people can and do write original works in Sindarin. Much of
> the Sindarin dialog in Lord of the Rings was not, in fact, taken from
> the books, but created specifically for the film. (I don't know if
> anyone does it in Quenya.) These are not imaginary languages in the same
> sense that Vulcan, Romulan, or pre-tlhIngan Hol Klingon. Tolkien created
> complete grammars for these languages, although most of the information
> is contained in his notes rather than in his published works. Due to
> various issues with Tolkien's estate, those notes are being released to
> the public at a mere trickle. (People have attempted to fill in the gaps
> based on analogies with natural languages and other Tolkien languages,
> so much of what today passes for Sindarin may be proved incorrect by
> notes as yet unpublished.)
>
> > Klingon is not altogether complete, but among languages created and
> > maintained by a single person, it certainly crosses the threshold from
> > imaginary to constructed. I'm not sure about "artificial". That's such
> > a strange term to describe a language.
>
> Only if "artificial teeth" is a strange term to describe dentures. It's
> not the original natural product, but it does the job. Etymologically,
> "artificial" means that something was made by skill or craft instead of
> occurring naturally.
>
> Those who actually do create and/or learn functioning artificial
> languages seem to prefer the term "constructed language" or "conlang".
> This is further subdivided into three types: "Engineered languages" or
> "eng(e)langs" attempt to prove some kind of a philosophical or logical
> point, such as Loglan, Lojban, or Laadan. "Auxiliary languages" or
> "auxlangs" attempt to be a neutral internation language, such as
> Esperanto, Interlingua, or Novial. "Artistic languages" or "artlangs"
> are created for entertainment purposes, like Quenya, Sindarin, or
> tlhIngan Hol.
>
> DISCLAIMER: I speak tlhIngan Hol and Esperanto. I do not speak any of
> the other languages I mentioned.
>
> (Well, I read and write tlhIngan Hol; I have no experience actually
> speaking it. And even my reading and writing have gotten rusty since I
> got married and had a child. Real life has taken time away from my hobbies.)
>
>
>
>
>

-- 
Sent from Gmail for mobile | mobile.google.com

Mark J. Reed <[email protected]>

Back to archive top level