tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Jan 27 13:26:56 2014
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: [Tlhingan-hol] centralised archive of new word sources
On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 3:55 AM, De'vID <[email protected]> wrote:
> I also have a small tidbit of info regarding (our lack of) sex
> terminology in Klingon. Marc told me that the reason Maltz might seem
> like a prude is because he's trying to fit in with the culture he's
> found himself in. (We had a discussion on the grammar of {nga'chuq}
> because of the Stonewall campaign.) That is, in-universe, Klingons in
> general have no problems talking about sex and other bodily functions,
> unlike Humans, but Maltz is reluctant to talk about sex for reasons
> specific to himself.
>
> My out-of-universe interpretation of this is that Marc is constrained
> in what he can say about sexual terminology because he's required, or
> perhaps feels he is required, to keep the Klingon language "family
> friendly" -- at least to the degree that swear words "defy
> explanation", violence is kept at a Trek-appropriate almost cartoonish
> level, and "mating" is referred to only in the context of an
> institution which is somewhat like marriage ("She was my mate!") or in
> quasi-comical insults ("Go mate with your targ!"). I guess he also has
> to leave open the possibility that the Star Trek writers may later
> contradict whatever he reveals about this issue, since they have
> operated thus far under the same set of "family friendly" constraints.
On the other side of things, Dothraki has two different words for
"woman on top sex".
I can see having restraints on words for a physical book published in the '80's.
Just imagine a parent buying what they think is an innocent blue book
for their child, only to find it filled with sex terms.
Pocket Books and Paramount would've wanted to keep things clean, yes.
But as MO is not (AFAIK) getting paid by Paramount for the new words
he gives us, and as these are not being printed in an actual book by
Pocket Books, I don't see the harm in giving us basic words in an
e-mail.
I'm sure we're all clever enough to come up with our own ways of
describing this stuff, but it'd be nice to have an official answer.
As far as later contradictions go; sexuality is varied enough that I
think we can handle additional information without it contradicting
anything.
~naHQun
--
~Michael Roney, Jr.
http://www.twitter.com/roneyii
https://plus.google.com/+MichaelRoneyJr/
_______________________________________________
Tlhingan-hol mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.kli.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol