tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed May 31 06:08:38 1995

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

new one = trigger

I have an amusing thought.  Occasionally we refer to a newcomer as a
{chu'wI'} "one who is new".  {chu'} is also "activate", and {chu'wI'}
"thing which activates" has its own entry in TKD.  So we apparently
have a slang term for a newcomer to the list:  a "trigger".

This term is occasionally appropriate.  Fresh ideas are rare; usually
someone who has recently joined this list makes often-seen errors and
"triggers" the usual stock responses.  Sometimes a newcomer's thoughts
are sufficiently cogent to bring up a long-debated and never-resolved
nuance of the language ("Hoch" as a number, for instance).  This too
"triggers" a flurry of discussion.  All too often, we see misguided
attempts to enlarge the vocabulary.  "Trigger" again; usually a few
well-crafted arguments suffice to convince the offender that to "make"
novel words is a bad thing, but sometimes the ripples continue for a
long time.  The occasional truly fresh idea also sets off a sequence of
points and counterpoints as we wrestle with its implications (for example,
TKD 5.3 "...after the FINAL noun.")

I wonder if we should try to come up with a different and more descriptive
way to refer to "fresh blood".  My personal preference is to keep using
{chu'wI'} and enjoy the ambiguity.  It's harder for {chu'wI'pu'} to deal
with, but it makes using the language so much more fun.

-- ghunchu'wI'                                                         *       *

Back to archive top level