tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Thu Feb 17 07:36:28 1994
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
grammarians
- From: Captain Krankor <[email protected]>
- Subject: grammarians
- Date: Thu, 17 Feb 94 18:37:36 -0700
I'd like to add one thing to what Eli said in his clarification of the role
of grammarians on this list.
In slight contrast to the way Eli worded it, the Grammarians do have the
authority to set policy of what is proper Klingon for this list. HOWEVER:
The actual invocation of this authority is extremely limited and applicible
only under specific circumstances.
There are two, somewhat related circumstances:
1) When the canon is sufficiently ambiguous that no argument one way
or the other wins definitively, and the issue is of sufficient
importance that a single solution is desirable in order that everyone
is on the same page and can understand.
2) When the an issue receives such prolonged argument that it
becomes a rat hole, consuming time and bandwidth and accomplishing
nothing. At that point it becomes desirable to just pick a solution
and move on.
The goals which motivated this authority, which has been present
since the inception of the list, are also two-fold:
1) Make sure everyone is on the same page, speaking the same
language, so that it doesn't become a tower of babylon.
2) Keep the signal-to-noise ratio high.
Indeed, these are two of the guiding principles of all the structure
of the list.
Now, it should be noted and emphasized: In the entire lengthy
history of this list (some 3 years or so), I have invoked this
authority a sum total of about twice. I no longer even remember on
what issues. I think one of them was the compromise I finally made
with Ken Beesley on assuming nouns from verbs and the use of -ghach.
And even on that one I've been extremely loose in enforcing it.
For the record, the official list policy is that you cannot directly
assume a noun form from a verb, but you can directly put a -ghach on
a verb which has no other suffixes. For all of you who read Glen
Proechel's article and think this is a new issue, let me assure you,
we've been down that rat hole many times before.
About the only other things I can think of off the top of my head
that I ever used my authority to decree were things that were part
of official list policy at the outset, including not making up new
things whole-cloth, using correct spelling and casing, allowing
punctuation, and not transliterating.
We have witnessed an interesting evolution on this list which has
modified the emphasis which these two goals receive. Goal 2 has
received far more attention than goal 1. The reasons are *also*
two-fold:
1) A larger number of skilled users of the language than ever before
means that most of the active participants don't get confused if
someone does something slightly unkosher, hence the diminishment of
goal 1.
2) The general popularity of the list has gotten to the point where
it can generate up to 50 messages a day, hence emphasizing goal 2.
As such, we currently allow greater flexibility and individuality in
the fuzzy areas of grammar than was originally envisioned. We are
all enough on the same page that a little variation hasn't been a
problem. I point this out explicitly here, though, as a reminder:
One thing which has become a problem is that we are leaving
beginners in the dust. I therefore make the strong request that
people keep in mind who they are addressing, and if it is a
beginner, please try to stick more towards the accepted standards.
For instance, I'm not gonna come out and decree that only "to be"
verbs can be used adjectivally, but use some sense. You *know*
you're gonna leave a beginner in the dust by trying to do "loD qet"
instead of "qetbogh loD". Yes, me and mark and charghwI' and Nick
and marnen and Guido will get it (and I apologize to anyone
appropriate I left out), but you are not always writing to such
people who have already mastered basic sentence parsing. Sometimes
you are. Fine. We will continue to be lenient in this regard as
long as it doesn't cause excessive confusion.
Well, enough of my babbling. I think you get the idea. The main
point is that, while the grammarians can act as this kind of
tie-breaker, in general it happens less than once a year. The fact
that I state an opinion on a grammatic point doesn't make it law,
although I flatter myself that you all will give my opinion some
weight. When the decree clause is invoked, it will be explicitly
stated as such, I promise.
And also, obviously, things established as language standards for
this list are just that: for this list. They do not make it gospel
truth for the entire Klingon-speaking world. In general, though, we
always try to be conservative, because the goal of avoiding a Tower
of Babylon applies to the wider Klingon community as well.
--Captain Krankor, Founding Grammarian