tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Apr 29 07:56:32 1996

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: {lab} vs. {lI'}

According to Steven Boozer:
> 
> >>> It just occurred to me, in trying to remember the difference
> >>> between {lab} and {lI'},...
> > 
> >Okrand's choice of words was very bad in these definititions, but if you
> >look at their actual useage in ST3 (the only canon usage for either term),
> >{lab} is used to describe sending a message and {lI'} is used to describe
> >receiving one. This occurs when the Genesis Project data is transmitted
> >from Valkris to Kruge.
>  
> Not quite. 

In your humble opinion.

> If we look at the actual dialog in ST3, we see that {lab} and 
> {lI'} are both used in the sense of "transmit":
> 	Valkris:  HablI' Su' labbeH. 	"[Tranceiver] Ready to transmit."

Note that the transceiver was about to upload/send. It was
about to transmit a message away from a itself; away from a
place.

> 	Kruge:	  De' yIlI'... DaH! 	"Transmit data... now!"

I interpret that this command was not given to Valkris. It was
being addressed to Kruge's own communications officer. He was
telling him to download/receive the message. He wanted his
communications officer to transmit the message to his ship; to
a place.

> The words are glossed in TKD as:
> 	lI'  	   transmit data (to a place)

Okrand was not all that familiar with the nominclature for
transmitting computer data or had difficulty describing it in
the dictionary. He meant that the place participating in the
transmission is the place to which the message is being sent,
hence downloading/receiving.

> 	lab        transmit data (away from a place)

Here, he means that the place participating in the transmission
is sending the message away from itself; away from a place,
hence uploading/sending. 

We've argued this out in the past and the issue is pretty much
settled. If this interpretation is not taken, then the "to a
place" and "from a place" becomes meaningless. It is clear from
the comparison of these definitions that one means to upload
and the other means to download. The task for us is not to
ignore this and make up our own definition, as you have done,
but to decypher which one is which. Since Valkris is doing the
uploading and Kruge is doing the downloading, and Valkris only
uses {lab} while Kruge only uses {lI'}, then unless Okrand
makes some new, clearer, more explicit explanation of the
difference between these two verbs, this is the ONLY acceptable
interpretation.

> And we have two additional examples from TKD:
> 	labbeH     "(The device) is ready to transmit data.
> 	vIlI'lI'   "I am transmitting (the data)."

These examples do not make clear which direction the message is
being transmitted and without context. Meanwhile, the
definitions clearly indicate that there is a difference between
these two verbs and that difference is related to the direction
of the transmission.

> What can we deduce? Two possibilities come to mind:

Neither of your possibilities explains why Okrand's definitions
included the terms "to a place" and "from a place". You are
ignoring that completely.

> 1) The verbs distinguish between the explicit (i.e. stated in the
> sentence) presence or absence of an (in)direct object, either what is
> being transmitted (the data) or where it's being sent (person or place).
> {lab} refers to transmitting in general: no stated object; {lI'} assumes a
> receptor for the transmission. 

So, why the "to a place" and "from a place" in the definitions?
You don't address this rather fundamental point.

> So, Valkris is just telling Kruge she's
> about to switch on her transmitter and he should turn on his recorder. 
> Kruge activates a switch (as I recall) and tells her to "Transmit the 
> data [to me]... now!" 

There is no reason to presume that Kruge is talking to Valkris
instead of to a member of his own crew.

> And in TKD, {labbeH} simply means that the device is 
> OPERATIONAL, but {vIlIlI'} is "I am transmitting IT."

This brings me back to my discontent over Okrand's failure to
notate transitivity/intransitivity in his definitions, but
that's a long story. I'm starting to document canon useage for
each verb, but that will take a while...

> 2) Interestingly, {lab} seems to refer to what the transmitting device
> itself does, while {lI'} refers to the actions of the person operating it.

It seems that if this were Okrand's intent, his definitions
could have been quite a bit clearer. As it is, we have two
identical definitions with different parenthetical notes. The
notes don't say "(a device does this)" and "(a person does
this)" the way that other definitions state "(husband does
this)" and "(wife does this)" for the verbs meaning "marry".
Instead, the notes say, "(to a place)" and "(from a place)".
There is the difference between these two verbs.

You can't see that difference in any of the examples in TKD, so
you have to look at the movie context. Meanwhile, the movie
context is not altogether clear, except that we know that
Valkris is doing the sending while Kruge is doing the receiving
and each of them uses one of the two verbs once. If Kruge is
talking to Valkris, then this remains confusing. If he is
addressing a member of his crew, then everything is clear and
simple. I choose to interpret it as clear and simple.

> This idea is marred, somewhat, by the word {HablI'} "data tranceiving
> device", which is formed from {lI'} and not {lab}. ({Hab} "be smooth" is 
> of no help here.)

Please note that for this entire scene, the actress portraying
Valkris was filmed speaking English, literally saying exactly
what her subtitles say she is saying. Okrand had to write new
lines for her in Klingon which would fit her English lip
movements while still remaining meaningful in Klingon, yet
never sounding like the original English words. It was
remarkable that he could do this at all, but the result is some
of the strangest grammatical constructions in canon, like the
whole {rIntaH} business which became necessary when otherwise
Valkris would have finished her sentence, but her lips were
still moving. So, he added {rIntaH} for no reason except to
give her two more syllables to explain why her lips were still
moving, and he made up new grammar to justify her saying the
word. It is not used anywhere else in canon.

So, the whole line about the transmitter being ready to
transmit itself was wholly created to match her lip movements.
It is probably why we have both {-rup} and {-beH}. I don't know
of any other canon examples of {-beH}. The point is that the
line is weird. It had to be weird. That doesn't mean we have to
speak as weirdly as that line, so delving deeply into matching
the mindset behind the construction of that line is probably
unwise.

> Note that these two interpretations are related. I would suggest that
> Okrand wasn't interested in the specific type of transmission (general
> broadcast vs. tight beam), or the direction _per se_ (send vs. receive). 
> {lab} and {lI'} both mean "send". Okrand was trying to distinguish the
> subject of the verb (device vs. person) and whether it could take an 
> object.

So, once again, why does the definition include "to a place"
and "from a place" if neither of your interpretations address
this at all? You actively dismiss the presence of these words
in the definition.

> Does anyone know if there are other verbs that make this distinction in 
> the subject?

{Saw} and {nay} do, but that is written explicitly in their
definitions. I take this as precedent that if Okrand wanted to
express what you think he wanted to express, he simply would
have, but since he didn't I expect you've completely missed the
point of the definitions.

> P.S.  Just for the hell of it, I have included an extract from my own
> laboriously compiled Annotated Klingon Dictionary (AKD), which I searched
> in collecting material for this post. I thought that others who have made
> their own online dictionaries would be interested in how I organized mine.
> N.B. This is an ASCII version of a document originally written in MS-Word
> for DOS 6.0 format where I use different fonts to distinguish the sources
> within an entry. I use plain text (English) and bold text (tlhIngan Hol)
> for Okrand's canon, italics for my own suggestions, expansions and
> coinings--including the usages developing on this Mailing List (ML)--and
> small caps for Glen Proechel's suggestions (GP). In this extract, italics
> and small caps have been converted into CAPS to easily identify what is
> non-canon. 
> 
> -- Extract from my AKD ----------------------------------------------------- 
> Hab  be smooth - Hab SoSlI' Quch Your mother has a smooth forehead!! PK
> HablI'  data transceiving device, TRANSCEIVER, TRANSMITTER - HablI' Su'
>    labbeH Ready to transmit. ST3;  MODEM (ML);  MAILING LIST (ML) 
>    [now cf. jabbI'IDghom (ML)]

Note that lip movements match:

HablI' = Ready

Su' = to

labbeH = transmit

> Steven 
> (Still waiting for his copy of _HolQeD_ #17 to arrive! Lawrence!?)

charghwI'
-- 
reH lugh charghwI' net Sov.

Back to archive top level