tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sat Nov 23 15:49:12 1996

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: Engishization of Klingon (Was: RE: KLBC a phrase about H


T::>Now, I do agree to some extent that Okrand's been a little careless here
 ::>and there lately.  But I don't think it is to an extreme extent.  He *does*
 ::>still care about the language, and *is* still concerned with keeping some
 ::>linguistic purity in it.  Some of the problem is simply that the language
 ::>has by now gotten too big to fit all in his head at once.  He can't
 ::>remember all the previous canon and check for consistency, or all the rules
 ::>at once.  We can do a better job, because there are more of us.  Having him
 ::>turn over Klingon to a group with him still as final arbiter is another
 ::>thing altogether.  That might work out (depending on how well he maintained
 ::>his control).  Some suggestions regarding ways to help solve this problem
 ::>have actually been suggested to him (and he likes some), but he's a little
 ::>too heads-down in work most of the time.

 I'm sure that this idea has been suggested, but just in case it
 hasn't:

 What if the KLI were to debate and come up with a conclusion
 that was felt by the KLI to be consistent with what we know,
 both in terms of "feel" and in "technical" terms?  Then, after
 a few such have been compiled, submit them (with summaries of
 the reasoning) to Marc Okrand to be "blessed".  This way, M.O.
 doesn't necessarily have to keep the whole language in his
 head, nor does he have to necessarily go through various piles
 of notes, books, programs, audiotapes, etc., to see if there's
 a conflict with an existing word, or whatever, because the KLI
 has done that.

 Later on, if M.O. decides that he "wants out", he can simply
 say that he is satisfied with the KLI's progress in
 understanding, and developing, the language, and he hereby
 blesses the committee that previously wrote up the final
 proposals, designating them the Klingon equivalent of the
 Academe Francais or some such.

T::>>The main danger in this would be dissention in the ranks, especially if
 ::>>one's favorite construction were disallowed.  We would need a rigorous
 ::>>process fair to all involved for deciding issues, and the discipline of
 ::>>Klingon warriors to abide by the KLI's decisions.  But I'd rather have
 ::>>the Hol in the hands of people I trust, who have the skill and the love
 ::>>of the language to do right by it, than in the erratic hands it's in

T::>I dunno.  A group of people arguing their favorite viewpoints is likely to
 ::>be even more erratic than Okrand has been (I think "erratic" is too strong
 ::>a word at any rate).  It's bad enough when we can't agree now that we say
 ::>"we'll have to await clarification"; can you imagine if we had to decide on
 ::>an answer and some of US make others wrong?

 This makes it sound like it will be an either/or situation.
 What about a consensus-based process?  What about the
 passage in TKD2 (p11):

        There are a number of dialects of Klingon....

        Some dialects differ only slightly from the dialect of
        this dictionary. Differences tend to be in vocabulary
        (...) and in the pronunciation of a few sounds.  On the
        other hand, some dialects differ significantly...the
        speakers of these dialect have a great deal of
        difficulty communicating with current Klingon
        officialdom.

 which to me suggests that perhaps all of the suggestions are
 correct, but for different dialects.  Certainly, this would
 seem to allow a good amount of leeway for filling out the
 vocabulary, and for "questionable" grammatical constructs.

T::>>now.  (Am I the only one dismayed by Okrand's musing (threat?) that
 ::>>Klingon orthography might not be alphabetic?)

T::>I'm not dismayed.  I rather hope it turns out not to be, and we get a nice
 ::>weird one.  I hope he gives us an excuse to make the alphabetic one "OK",
 ::>like the excuse I use, but I'd be quite happy with a non-alphabetic
 ::>system.  Alphabets are too easy.  Given Klingon's mainly CVC structure, I,
 ::>too, think a syllabary would go well.  It wouldn't need over 4000 glyphs;
 ::>consider a hybrid system of some symbols for the CV combinations (including
 ::>diphthongs or not among V) and another set of final bare consonants for use
 ::>at the ends of syllables.  That's not all that unheard-of in a writing
 ::>system.  (of course, various exceptions for rgh and whatnot).  Or alphabets
 ::>or syllabaries for the content words and special symbols for the affixes
 ::>(as someone suggested).  So we'd even have different spellings for the two
 ::>meanings of -wI', etc.

 Another idea that occurred to me was that there would be glyphs
 for the combinations of consonants (or consonant clusters, such
 as rgh, w', or y') that may occur at the beginning and end of a
 syllable, with diacritical marks to indicate the vowels.  You
 wouldn't need the 4000+ glyphs - assuming only 5 vowels, you'd
 only need 800+, plus 5 diacritical marks.  And that number goes
 down if you manage to identify combinations that happen not to
 occur in the language.

 But, however it comes out, I'd like to see a "wierdie" for the
 formal definition of pIqaD, too.

==========================================================================
Jeff Zeitlin                                      [email protected]
---
 � OLXWin 1.00b � If it's tourist season, where do I get a license?

Back to archive top level