tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Aug 20 12:04:36 1997

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing



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

Re: wo'maj 'oH wo''a' tIn 'e'



[email protected] on behalf of Joel Peter Anderson wrote:
> 
> > This is the only sort of thing that worries me about the new book.  Now
> > that 
> > we have slang ways to say things which needed to be recast before, people
> > are 
> > going to start relying on these slang terms, and never learn "proper"
> > Klingon. 
> 
> yIleS!

jIleSqu'taH.  bItchugh vay' 'ej Seychugh, reH jatlh yIleS.

> *THIS* is the thing that delights me about the new book.  While a cynical
> observor *could* say the abundance of newly canonical oddities was Okrand
> backpedaling to patch up Paramount's many linguistic sins, I'd prefer to
> say he is showing just how diverse and varied the Klingon languages are.

I say it's both.  What kind of observer does that make me?  (maj ram, indeed.)

> I would hope that it would endorse a spirit of tolerance toward those
> whose tlhIngan Hol does not match our own grammatical expectations (much
> as we turn a blind eye toward everyday communications that are riddled
> with spelling and grammatical errors).

There's a difference between tolerance and ignoring.  When it comes to 
Klingon, I tolerate mistakes, but I do not ignore them.  Ignoring a problem 
only encourages it.

KGT has given us specific rules as to when slang, idioms, and intentional 
ungrammatical constructions are to be used.  These rules are not to be thrown 
by the wayside, just because you want to use them in some other way.

KGT tells us that the pseudo-suffixes {-luH} and {-la'} are used very 
infrequently, and so we ourselves should use these very infrequently.  KGT 
also tells us that slang is generally not used in formal situations.  When we 
are speaking in or talking about a formal situation, we'd better cut the slang 
out of our speech.

I think that following these guidelines is what will make the language more 
varied.  Using slang in whatever context you might want, as you seem to 
advocate, would simply increase our vocabulary, but without any corresponding 
usage distinctions.  It would be watered down.

-- 
SuStel
Beginners' Grammarian
Stardate 97636.7


Back to archive top level