tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Thu Nov 21 14:55:38 1996
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: Engishization of Klingon (Was: RE: KLBC a phrase about Honor)
- From: "William H. Martin" <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: Engishization of Klingon (Was: RE: KLBC a phrase about Honor)
- Date: Thu, 21 Nov 1996 17:54:02 -0500 ()
- Priority: NORMAL
On Wed, 20 Nov 1996 13:55:24 -0800 Qov <[email protected]> wrote:
> At 09:19 18/11/96 -0800, ter'eS wrote:
...
> }I'm afraid that's what happens with Okrand. By all accounts, he's not as
> }deeply into tlhIngan Hol as most of us on this list.
"By ALL accounts... MOST of us on this list"?
jIQochqu'! bIQubpa' bIjatlh 'ej ngoDmeyqoq DachenmoH.
> )His original
> }language is internally consistent, but I've noted a disturbing trend:
> }these days, when he makes a grammatical addition or a new word, it tends
> }to replicate English logic, and not Klingon. {muvwI'} is an example of
> }this.
Your example does not happen to be of a new word. The {tuj
muvwI'} to which I think you refer is from the oldest extra-TKD
source we have for vocabulary. You've made a rather large sweep
in your generality here and I think you have over-extended
yourself.
I do not think there are many here who can justly criticize
Okrand's use of the langauge. Those who would most passionately
do so tend to favor rather short-sighted alterations, like the
common use of headless relatives, or other rather obscure
constructions, as exist in this very post.
> }I'm not sure what my point is here, except that it seems that Okrand has
> }lost his original inspiration for Klingon, and his choices are making it
> }more and more like English as he goes along.
Nice fantasy. Okrand doesn't care about the language anymore, so
we, who care SO much more than he does can just take it and do
what we want with it. baQa'!
> jIQochbe', te'reS. pIj DIvI' mu' rurqu' tlhIngan mu', meq tu'be'lu'taHvIS.
SoHvaD meq nobnIS'a' *Okrand*? bIpotlhba'!
> jIH (HaSta) jIH (bej) je tIqel.
mu'mey ngo'qu' bIH.
> pab chu' chenmoHDI' Marc Okrand DIvI' Hol rur.
> bong chenmoH'a' chaq 'e' vISIv.
"Does he make it accidentally? Perhaps I wonder that."
bIjatlhchu'be' 'e' vIHar. We have no canon for the object
sentence in Sentence As Object being a question, and I've never
felt comfortable about it, especially in THIS form where
"wonder" is used more like a verb of speech with the object
sentence being more of a quotation than as the kind of
verb-object relationship I expect from SAO.
bong chenmoH 'e' DapIHlaw'. jISaHbe'. Hol chenmoHta'. ghaH
wIvuvnIS. ghaH vIvuvbej! DavuvHa' DaneHchugh vaj maSuv. *Okrand*
vIHubmo' jIHem.
> tlhIngan pabDaj'e' Sovqu'be'law' Marc
> Okrand.
ramqu' ngoDqoq. chaq loQ qar neH, ach loQ qarHa' je. bInIv 'e'
DaHarchugh vaj bIDoghchoH. qoHna' DaDa. bInoHlaHbe'. *Okrand*
DaHIvlaH 'e' Dabajta'be'.
> tlhIngan pab le' lo'bejmeH, Hoch 'eb jonbe'ba' ghaH. <yIn nI' yISIQ
> 'ej yIchep> qon ghaH. meqvamvaD puplaw' -jaj. qatlh -jaj lo'be'? ghaytan
> lIj neH.
chaq qech pIm 'oS *Okrand* mu'tlhegh. bIyajchu' 'ej yajHa'
*Okrand* qatlh 'e' DaHar? *Okrand* yab DaSov'a'?
> vay' lIj Hoch net chaw'ba' 'ach pab bIvDI' Okrand pabna'
> wIngu'laHbe'.
'ej not DabIv 'e' DaHar'a'? nagh wa'DIch DabaHlaH 'e' DaHar'a'?
> tlhIngan Hol chenmoHlaH Okrand neH 'e' wIwuq 'ach Holmaj
> Qorgh neHbe'law'mo' jImogh.
Do'Ha'. SoHvaD choHQo' qo' naQ. SoHvaD bom chuS'ughHom le'.
Holmaj Dara'rupbe'. jaS bIHarchugh vaj qoHna' SoH. qoH'a' SoH.
> SKI: Qov agrees and is frustrated by it.
SKI: charghwI' is not impressed and remains loyal to the creator
of the language.
> ---
> Qov (Robyn Stewart) [email protected] tlhIngan Hol ghojwI'
charghwI'