tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Thu Feb 03 23:32:46 1994

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: Computer lists, and vocab

On Feb 3,  3:52pm, ~mark wrote [and charghwI' replies]:
> Subject: Computer lists, and vocab
...
> Note "mej" and "tlheD", rather near synonymns.  We also have jagh, ghol,
> and 'ovwI' (maybe.  Look up the last under 'ov).  

     I dunno. I see a significant difference in shade of meaning between an
enemy, an adversary/opponent and a competitor. I could see facing you as a
friend in a contest and saying:

not jaghlIj jIH 'ach DaH ghollIj jIHqu' 'ej reH HochvaD 'ovwI' jIHtaH.

     To paraphrase a recent poster: Mwahahaha'a 'a   'aahhhh

> Or HeQ and lob. There are certainly subtle differences between these,...

     I'm not sure it is so subtle. "Comply" implies that one does the minimum
to fulfill the requirement, while maintaining one's right to reserve judgment
on the wisdom of this choice. "Obey" implies much more submission. If a
servant says "I comply to your commands," that will probably not serve the
same function as "I obey your commands." You obey your superior officers. You
comply with the terms of the Organian Peace Treaty. If you comply to the
commands of your superior officers, you get fired (at by a disruptor). If you
obey the Organian Peace Treaty, you get laughed at by your friends.
...
> How come qawHaq appears twice in the listings?

     I suspect Okrand was making fun of our confusion concerning plurality of
the term. In Trekdom, they always access their data banks, even though "bank"
is a collective term with vague boundaries. The Oxford Concise Dictionary
defines "data bank" as "place where data are stored in large amounts". So why
does Trek always add the "s"? Even Data says it, though we know that he has a
single positronic brain, presumably located in one place, containing all the
data. Hmm. Or could it be that if Data says that his hands remember how to
tie a knot, or that his feet remember how to find his quarters, HE REALLY
MEANS IT?

     Of similar interest is the term "troop", which is a collective term that
should generally be used in the singular, except when referring to people in
the military, when it becomes plural, even though you never use it in the
singular to refer to an individual in the military, thus the following rules
by example on the use of "troop/troops":

* Any civilian group of individuals can be a "troop"
* A specific kind of military group is a "troop"
* Civilian individuals are never "troops"
* Soldiers are "troops"
* A soldier is never a "troop"
* A soldier is never "one of the troop"
* A soldier is "one of the troops"
* A civilian may be "a member of the troop"
* A soldier may be "a member of the troop"
* No one is ever "a member of the troops"
* Any person may "belong to the troop"
* No person ever "belongs to the troops"
* Any person addressing their subordinates "talks to the troops"
* Even when talking to a non-military group, no one ever "talks to the troop"
* Even though "a troop of troops" makes sense, it is NEVER okay to say it.

     Try explaining THAT to someone learning English. It's kinda like the
Borg before Hugh. Note that Okrand gave us a word for "troops", but did not
give us one for "troop". This made it unnecessary for him to add his usual
"(military term)" as he does for "camp" and such.

charghwI'

Back to archive top level