tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Nov 29 11:22:31 1995
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: A test (cha'logh jIjang)
- From: Adam Walker <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: A test (cha'logh jIjang)
- Date: Wed, 29 Nov 95 13:18:34 -0600
- Organization: Dallas Baptist University
> Date sent: 28-Nov-95 23:41:09 -0600
> From: CAANDERS @ INTERNET (Alan Anderson) {[email protected]}
> To: TLHINGAN @ INTERNET (Multiple recipients of list) {[email protected]}
> Send reply to: TLHINGAN @ INTERNET {[email protected]}
> Subject: Re: A test (cha'logh jIjang)
> [maH chaHbogh maHbe']
>
> charghwI' writes:
> >The Klingon mind wants to see something happen. What exactly is happening
> >in your sentence? What purpose or mission is being served? Where is honor?
> >Why would any Klingon bother with those three words? It is as bad as "taH
> >pagh taHbe'", which is the worst thing Okrand ever wrote.
>
> taghqIj writes:
> >Does this mean the Klingon mind has no capacity for extending itself?
>
> Just what would you have it extend itself to? You have put together a
> very strange "sentence" here; where do you intend it to go? What does
> it mean? I don't want to know what its English translation is, I want
> to know what you mean by it.
>
> >The
> >original sentence in English, 'We are not who we are', was not
> >particularly nice, but that did not make it a bad sentence.
>
> "Not particularly nice" is an understatement! Actually, I believe that
> "we are not who we are" IS a bad sentence. It contradicts itself, thus
> it has no useful meaning. I repeat my original question, but this time
> in English: Why the $#@ would you want to write such a weird sentence?
> I can see no use for it. Again, what does it mean?
The "meaning" of sentences like these is found within the contex in
which they exist. Contradictions and tautologies are often EXTREMELY
useful ways of communicating, but must be understood within the
famework of the discourse of which they are a part.
>
> >I refuse to
> >believe that Klingons are so intellectually bankrupt as to disallow any
> >deviation from their established language. The language of the warrior
> >must be flexible. Combat situations are anything but staid. And if the
> >language must be used in odd or ugly ways to say unusual things, then so
> >be it.
>
> I don't see your point. What deviations are you referring to? Where
> is the inflexibility to which you allude? Your sentence is certainly
> odd, and what you are trying to say is certainly unusual, but I still
> don't know what you MEAN by what you're trying to say. You have lost
> the whole point of language: communication. If the words come out so
> unusual as to be difficult to understand, then choose different words.
I believe that the inflexability referred to might posssibly be in
the mind of the person to whom he was responding!!
>
> >> begin 600 WINMAIL.DAT
> >> M>)\^(@P-`0:0" `$```````!``$``0>0!@`(````Y 0```````#H``$-@ 0`
> >..
> >> <[\.7O;H!'@`]``$````%````4D4Z( `````/GP`'
> >
> >What the hell is -this-, by the way? :)
>
> Perhaps charghwI' has had his email system invaded by nanites? :-)
> (Seriously, Will, you should get this annoying behavior fixed.)
AMEN!!!!
<SHNIP!>
> >[That second sentence is a little convoluted. What I wanted to say was:
> >'If you are not (mis-, more than just <be'>) willing to allow that new
> >Klingons experiment while writing, the language has died (already)]
Experimentation must have some limits, but MUST exist as part of the
learning process. Some experiments will produce unsatisfactory
results, but these are valuable experiences too. They let you know
what WON'T work. Just beware, some people undersatnd the creative
aspects of language better than others. Think about the grades
people get in literature class.
Qapla'
Qogh.