tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Jun 24 02:28:11 2009
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: Klingon orthography
- From: "Michael Roney, Jr." <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: Klingon orthography
- Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2009 05:26:24 -0400
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to :reply-to:subject:in-reply-to:x-mailer:mime-version:content-type; bh=7MpN2GAgqZONWrCTcOZlv/QfxM1eAIQSMeo4m3N9hjo=; b=vnOkRL6cfFiSOlnY2DQswd0f1ttYzJUJer3eW2OGXbasJCc9zsQiB/MaUVwC/sT8hK uwWfEWDOjuERgErggs7apmAUGawKRIl/2aIg38UTi3g6AeLAehRhZWMsPjvQxLZ0eVcA ryETgS8XFCqnnxiglL4yey/jB26+OGCBDYwRU=
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:reply-to:subject:in-reply-to:x-mailer :mime-version:content-type; b=cmmFAt/8HV6pzdPONN66HA+6zxna8YEb7BRVRthx1jx8JzfVhJcG3D+D4K8Hgqy6qX V2IJKAf9/yDPhLG/hsjbIxlw/UgSFscPTFqQXXtFaTWfwMTm02NWwHHwofHWJ4rm9ivs O4PzP8K7rFIvxKCNBTwzzrw5VbniuYs4YmW/I=
- In-reply-to: <[email protected]>
Oh I can see all but one of your characters just fine (one of the Q options). *Typing* them is another story.
~naHQun
-Michael Roney, Jr.
Professional Klingon translator
http://twitter.com/roneyii
--Sent from my Palm PreMichael Everson wrote:
On 24 Jun 2009, at 10:02, Michael Roney, Jr. wrote:
> Things that didn't make it into other messages.
>
> I think our current system *looks* just fine. It's pleasing to the
> eye. My eye anyway.
I find it tiresome and think it would be advantageous to the language
if the freedom to use more traditional typography were available. At
minimum Q/q prevents that.
> I think the accepted pIqaD glyphs look fine too.
I haven't said anything about those.
> I feel that Tengwar is too unKlingon for my use.
I think Q should be represented by Tengwa 12 but the rest of the
system was unobjectionable.
> Yes, when 3rd parties print Klingon in all caps, we lose the Q/q
> distinction.
And that's a bad thing.
> Despite what Unicode might become, it's not yet universal.
Betcha a beer it's the character set in your Palm Pre.
> We need universal symbols/letters.
pIqaD isn't, since it's not encoded.
> The ones printed on our English keyboards should do fine.
>
> I fail to see a problem beyond Q/q. Therefore I fail to see why more
> than that needs to change.
If Q/q is solved then "normal" casing is available for the rest of the
orthography. There are valid questions that arise about the need for
digraphs and trigraphs, though those are not harmful (although #ng-h#
~ #n-gh# can be ambiguous at syllable boundary).
Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/