tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Jul 07 11:39:01 1993

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Open letter to Elias Israel

EliasvaD,

     DIs cha' mI' wa' HolQeDDaq lughchoHmoHwI' pong ghitlhHom
vIghItlhta'bogh.

     DIs cha' mI' cha' HolQeDDaq law' bepwI'pu'.

     munuQbe'.

     jIQagh. JIQaghvIpbe'.

     bIQagh je. bIQaghvIpbe'.

     majatlh. majaq. tlhIngan Hol QaQghachvaD vum juppu' QaQ.

     maghItlhchoHtaHvIS tlhIngan Hol QaQ law' maghItlhbe'taHvIS tlhIngan Hol
QaQ puS.

     maQagh. maghoj. wIghitlhghachvo' ghoj latlhpu' je.

     As for your specific points, SoHDaH jIjatlh was a misspelling. I did
intend SoHDaq jIjatlh. While SoHvaD jIjatlh does more properly imply that my
words are intended for  you, my original meaning was more that I speak to the
space you occupy. If you choose to listen, fine. If you choose to ignore me,
munuQbe'. It was an intentional attitude that I thought was appropriate for a
Klingon greeting, and a subtlety of meaning that I appreciated within the
resources of the language.

     You win on lupDujHomDaq bIHtaH mavjopmey'e'. It still feels wrong, based
on my gut reaction to it and on my conversation with Marc Okrand. He
explicitly said that he wanted to avoid all use of the verb to be. taH pagh
taHbe' was a fluke he initially resisted and eventually regretted. Meanwhile,
closer scrutiny of TKD reveals that my gut is simply wrong on this one and
Marc Okrand was inconsistent between his speech and his writing.

     I will add at this point that both the explanation of "qajatlh" and of
"taH pagh taHbe'" were published in the same issue as my article. Until I saw
that publication (with my completed work in it) I had no reason to think I
was wrong. That's a little late to correct my article. Dr. Schoen also
neglected to publish my letter in vol. 2. no. 2 apologizing for those
specific errors and SermanyuQDaq, which I belatedly found on my own. Instead,
he published my letter about the ternary number system where I blast Marc
Okrand for his ignorance of the nature of such a numbering system. The
selective publication makes me sound even more brash and unresponsive than I
am. Believe me, I need no help in appearing more brash and less responsive
when my mind is placed in a Klingon perspective.

     Finally, Qapla' vIQavlaHbe'taH contains a typo not of my own doing. I
just looked at my original file. It says, "Qapla' vIchavlaHbe'taH," which
quite plainly means, "I continue to not be able to achieve success." That
pretty much sums up the article. {{:)  I knew that things were wrong in other
works than my own, though I lacked the skill to do a whole lot better. I
tried where I saw what I thought to be flaws. Many WERE flaws. Others were 
proven to be unflawed examples of Klingon reinforced by evidence not
presented until after my article was presented. Then again, there were the
goofs. Given that I INVITED challenging responses to my bold accusations, I
think my percentage of accuracy is par for the literature, Captain Krankor
excepted, of course.

     Now, I've learned more. My Klingon is a long shot from HoD Qanqor's but
now it is a few small steps closer.

     Qapla'

--   charghwI'

Back to archive top level