fbpx Skip to content

Word: zoom

Category:

Description/Reason:

Either to zoom in/magnify (make part of an image appear larger) or to zoom out (make every part of an image appear smaller and see more of the whole image)


Comment below with feedback and suggestions.

15 thoughts on “zoom

  1. qa'HoS says:

    (mIllogh ‘ay’) tInmoH ‘ej pupqu’moH  make (an image segment) large and make it very highly resolved/sharp

    • Andrew Miller says:

      But you’re not really making it big per se, you’re causing it to take up more space or display more detail in the field of view.

      • qa'HoS says:

        True enough. How about tInmoHlaw’ ´ej pupqu’moH? And, of course, I mean this to apply to a specified image segment and not the entire image. Apparent size of a segment is augmented and resolution increased.

        • qa'HoS says:

          … and really, the pupqu’moH isn’t necessary strictly speaking. With any kind of magnification you can expect a loss of resolution — optical aberration with a lens, limited pixel density digitally, and so forth. Unless digital enhancement is involved, I would use tInmoHlaw’ and leave it a that.

          • Andrew Miller says:

            tInmoHlaw’ doesn’t mean make something seem big.

            -law’ encodes the impression of the speaker, so tInmoHlaw’ can only mean seem to make big (to me).

      • qurgh says:

        You are making it bigger though. When you zoom into an image the software uses math to increase the number of pixels used to display it. A 100x100px image, zoomed in 10 times, becomes a 1000x1000px image. Zooming in does the same thing as selecting the “resize” option, it’s just done in real-time and the software doesn’t store it as a change in image size.

        • Andrew Miller says:

          But you’re not making the object itself (i.e. the thing zoomed in on, depicted in the field of view of the lens/camera) bigger. That was what I assumed would be the object of this verb based on earlier comments on another word. If you are making it bigger then it’s just tInmoH and that’s all she wrote.

          • qa'HoS says:

            But what you’re zooming in is the image, not the object itself. When you zoom in on a segment of the image you are, in fact,  making that portion of the image bigger. If you want to talk about the thing itself as the object of magnification I still insist tInmoHlaw’ works. I’m aware that type 6 verb suffixes indicate the level of certainty of the speaker but one can make too much of that fact: If I say tInba’ Dochvam that’s obviously based on my own subjective experience but it still predicates something about the objective world. That it’s big and that the fact should be obvious not only to the speaker but to anyone else making the observation. The statement may be wrong but it is a statement about perceived reality and perception is what we’re discussing here. Also, the explanation of the use of –ba is that the speaker believes the statement should be obvious to the listener, the point being that the degree of certainty is, all things being equal, assumed to reflect objective reality. When I zoom in on something it seems bigger to me and, barring some perceptual phenomenon affecting other percipients, it should seem bigger to them too.

        • Andrew Miller says:

          Here’s an example of what I mean:

          ghew gham [zoom/magnify]DI’ noch, tInchoH gham ‘e’ cha’ jIH.
          When the sensor zooms in on/magnifies the insect’s leg, the monitor displays the leg getting bigger.

          • qa'HoS says:

            Of course, even with a special word for zoom, the leg could only appear to get bigger. tInchoH gham ‘e’ cha’ jIH means the monitor displays that the leg becomes small. In this case, the zooming out is conceived as a size change in the real object. tInlaw’ gham ‘e’ cha’ jIH works by, again, speaking only of appearance. Sure, it strictly means appearance to the speaker but the same is true in other languages. It looks big in English is cast in terms of the appearance to the speaker but, assuming the speaker to have normally operating perception, we can expect it to be an accurate statement of how other normal percipients would experience it watching the same monitor.

          • qa'HoS says:

            Correction:  the monitor displays that the leg become big

  2. Andrew Miller says:

    This is exactly why I suggestedd this request be formatted as magnify (optically) rather than zoom. Neat and thorough distinction from tIn.

    • qa'HoS says:

      With all respect (and that respect is considerable) the issues remain the same. Whether we say zoom or magnify, the portion of the image so affected appears larger relative to the non-augmented portions of the image if nothing else. If the process produces no distortion optically through lens effects or digitally through reaching the limit of pixelation then pupqu’moH might be added. I’m not sure what other aspects of zooming or magnifying you might want to express.

      • Andrew Miller says:

        Even if we assume that we can use -law’ to express this idea (I think we can’t), tInmoHlaw’ remains vague. If you want to reliably disinguish between CAUSING TO BE and CAUSING TO SEEM, you need a new verb root.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

The chabal tetlh software was created by Daniel Dadap, and is managed by Daniel Dadap and qurgh.

The Klingon Language Institute is a nonprofit corporation and exists to facilitate the scholarly exploration of the Klingon language and culture. Klingon, Star Trek, and all related marks are Copyrights and Trademarks of Paramount Pictures. All Rights Reserved. Klingon Language Institute Authorized User.