tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Mar 09 04:01:34 1994
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: Qaghqoq
- From: Captain Krankor <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: Qaghqoq
- Date: Wed, 9 Mar 94 15:01:55 -0700
Guido#1vo':
>I personally believe that we as (mostly) native English speakers are much too
>much English-oriented in our speaking/writing of tlhIngan Hol. Even several
>people who seem quite skilled in using the language feel they have to resort
>to translating all the Hol they see before they attempt to digest it. It is
>much much much much much better for the learning process to try NOT to
>translate, but to think directly in the language. Progress is sometimes a bit
>slower this way, but in the end, one comes out with a resoundingly better
>understanding of the language.
Absolutely, absolutely, absolutely! Thinking in the language is the
only way to go, with any language.
>For example, one might know the word {qoH} but not {Dogh}.
>Saying {qoH ghaH} is just a rather redundant and less Klingonesque way to say
>{Dogh}.
In your opinion. This is not proven fact. It is an issue of style,
and as such is speculative and subjective. Now, mind you, I agree
to a large extent with the kind of style you are arguing for, even
if I have not yet entirely succeeded in putting it into practice in
my own usage. But at the same time, it's just opinion, and I see
no basis for bashing someone if they say qoH ghaH. We certainly
agree that the premise this-is-how-its-done-in-English-so-it-must-be-
the-same-way-in-Klingon is totally bogus. But at the same time, one
is on quite shakey ground to claim this-is-how-its-done-in-English-so-
it-must-NOT-be-the-same-way- in-Klingon. Until and unless we know
for sure, people have to make their own best judgements about style.
However, it is certainly indisputable that it is a Good Thing(tm)
for one to have the knowledge to know that such a choice is
possible. If one chooses qoH ghaH because they like that style,
that's one thing; if they choose it by default because they simply
didn't know about Dogh, that's another thing entirely.
Personally, my own usage would be contextual; in my mind, qoH ghaH
is much more strongly derogatory. Dogh, to me, implies that, right
now, at present, he's acting foolish, whereas qoH ghaH says something
fundamental about his nature. It implies: he is a fool, he's
always been a fool, he'll always be a fool. But this is just my
take, not proven fact.
>BTW, has anyone read or even started reading my William Tell story? I would
>very much like feed-back on it.
My apologies, I seem to have lost it. Care to email me another copy?
[email protected]
>What I would really really really really REALLY like to see is use of
>tlhIngan Hol *outside* the English-speaking community.
>International/interlinguistic communication in tlhIngan Hol would greatly
>enrich and expand our understanding of the language. Has anyone done anything
>in the way of putting together a book designed to explain tlhIngan Hol to
>speakers of other Terran languages? Would this violate some sort of
>copyright? (I wouldn't think so, since it seems impossible to copyright a
>language, even an artificial one).
Funny you should mention this-- just last night I was proposing to a
French friend of mine, who knows a few words of Klingon, that he
should bone up on the language and do up the first Klingon/French
dictionary. I don't think he's gonna take me up on it, though.
--Krankor