tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Dec 12 15:16:52 1994

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing



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

Re: Abbridged Klingon Dict.




On Mon, 12 Dec 1994, William H. Martin wrote:
> According to David Barron:

> > In hopes to make it even more complete I have a rhyming dictionary
> > in the event I ever want to work on poetry in the warrior tounge.
> 
> Excellent idea.

*nod*
btw, does anyone have any canonical poems in <tlhIngan Hol>?  i've seen 
several translations of poetry, but am unaware of what is canon and what 
is someone's unofficial work.....  (just wondering if we have any canonical
evidence of the forms/structures/etc of Klingon poetry....)

> > 1) I need your feedback on whether this is a worthwhile addition to the 
> >    AKD.  I think it would be but this is a forum of disscusion so if there
> >    are any desents about this idea I want to know them.
> 
> Well, I think it has its good sides and its bad sides. On the
> good side, it would especially help expand the English-Klingon
> side of your dictionary to expidite writing in Klingon.
> Otherwise, when you want a word like "erradicate", you must
> continue to look up synonyms until you find one on the list
> (which is what most of us do).

agreed......

> On the bad side, this is a task impossible to finish. There are
> simply too many possible combinations. Secondly, as you codify
> these combinations, you invite yourself to act as judge for a
> great many subjective decisions that might differ from the
> conclusions that other might make (or even Okrand, himself).

also, don't forget that, by doing something like this for distribution, 
some (possibly many) beginners will gain these new words without *fully* 
understanding how they became such.  this i see as a major unwanted 
side-effect to such a list.

> I'd recommend one of three courses of action:
> 
> 1) Instead, simply give listings like, "erradicate - see
> destroy". Leave it up to context and personal inspiration to
> tune the meaning of "destroy", rather than fall to the
> temptation of being locked in to only one interpretation.

good idea -- this is probably the best for teaching.  the beginner can 
see that there is a *related* word, and can fine-tune it themselves.  of 
the three i think this is the best idea.

> 2) Do it, but mark your created entries plainly so that you and
> anyone else will know that these interpretations are NOT canon.

better yet:  include them ONLY in a special appendix, or perhaps series 
of appendices.  if you are going to make a list of all CANONICAL sources, 
do it.  but since these aren't canonical, their only place in such a 
listing would be in the back, or in the front, or wherever, but clearly 
marked separate.  (ie, if printing for distribution, use a different font 
entirely; if using ASCII text, use a border of *, %, &, etc.)

> 3) Get out while you still can.

*nodnodnodnodnod*

> > 2) Do you have any other words I can add?
> 
> Nope. I'm a classicist. I compile info from Okrand, but I seek
> to avoid assuming direct authority. Just indirect. My only
> authority comes from fidelity to the guy who created this
> language.

hrm... you got the stuff from the SkyBox cards, right.....?

> > David Barron 
> charghwI'

--naQ'avwI'

tlhIngan Hol Dajatlhchugh "[email protected]"Daq jabbI'IDmeylIj yIngeH
*&* Silauren, Half-Elven      *&* Jeremy  Greene *&*   There's only ONE god!
*&* [email protected]     *&*  Don't drop acid.  *&* He is the SUN god!!
*&* [email protected]       *&* Take it Pass/Fail. *&* Ra! Ra!! RA!!!
*&* "Get in there, you big furry oaf! I don't care what you smell!" -Han Solo



Back to archive top level