tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Dec 18 07:03:05 1996

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: parmaq (par'mach) - oh, it *IS* canon, eh?


mayq ghItlhta':

 At 02:25 PM 12/17/96 -0800, Joel Anderson wrote:

   >I never addressed the spelling, using it as given, since we don't know
   >from what Klingon dialect it comes (although I speculated on its
   >origin as being made up of par and mach). ...
   
   And that's why you think because YOU said it was a canonical word, that
   YOU were right. You were not. First off, you can't make a compound
   word out of verbs. And "small" being a noun is just not done. Same with
   "dislike". So it can't be a compound word. 

*sigh* 

I am sorry if I was unclear.  1) I pointed out it was a canonical word
because it occured within "canonical" Star Trek.  2) I speculated,
but did not insist on, the odd compound.  Natural languages (which
tlhIngan Hol pretends to be) often include words that don't follow
the rules. 
   
   All Dr. Okrand's doing is "covering Paramount's ass". Just
   because a Paramount writer throwing pencils at the roof thought of a
   new Klingon word, doesn't mean it's canon. NOW it's canon because Mr.
   Okrand said so.

Someday the Klingon language community will grow up and drop this childish
hostility toward Paramount's scriptwriters.  I doubt there is anyone here
capable of what they do.  I certainly couldn't, and *I* have a degree in
theater (including courses in scriptwriting). 

   It was NOT, however, when you had originally written your statement.

Well, yes it was - Okrand delineated it in terms of tlhIngan Hol, making
it fair game, and "canonical" to the tlhIngan Hol comunity.

   It could have been in his head at the time, but now we have a WRITTEN
   STATEMENT from the man himself. And, it is spelled differently than the
   word in the episode, and that means a lot. (Just another factor to the
   conclusion that Okrand's saving Paramount).

Quick - what is the capital of China?  The name of Libya's leader? 
Languages transliterated into English often vary widely in how they are
spelled in English (Hebrew, Arabic, Chinese...).  Anyway, spelling never
seems to matter much among the English using community here :).  After
all, we "Klingonists" in the "Klingon" Language Institute, *REALLY* study
tlhIngan Hol, right? 

    But it still doesn't make it a canon word. It's a language. 
    It has to CONFORM TO THE ORTHOGRAPHIC RULES. They can't just throw a
    word in here and there, not caring about grammar, because then it
    wouldn't be a full language any more. A language is a form of
    communication that encompasses grammar. 

The orthography shows us the right way to spell something, sure. But the
grammar - is it what defines the language, or does the language define it? 
I think that depends on whether you treat Klingon as an artifical
language, or a natural language.  In the former case the grammar is
prescriptive, in the latter, descriptive.  I'd contend that the reading
the materials from Okrand we are to treat it as a natural language and
describe the grammar as we discover it in the wild. 

Obviously I get some sick kick out of playing "bait the Klingon", pointing
out that the canon Klingon vocabulary is larger than that defined in TKD
and other Okrand generated sources.  Please understand that I recognize
the interests of the KLI and that MOST tlhIngan ghojwI'pu' focus on the
Okrand corpus.  Read Holtej's FAQ, section 2.10 on "I just heard Worf
say... what does it mean" (I wrote it). 


   joel anderson * [email protected] * [email protected]
 mIghghachvo' yImej 'ej yIQaQ; roj yInej 'ej Dochvam yItlha'
    http://members.aol.com/JPKlingon * [email protected]

Back to archive top level