tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Nov 05 23:43:21 1997

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing



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

Re: Questions as objects (was KLBC: Mole's tale)



In a message dated 97-11-04 15:35:27 EST, ghunchu'wI' writes:

<< However, I
 >would argue that users of a language have a right to innovate new usages
 >when they can find no other efficient way to say what they mean.  
 
 Users of a natural language eventually cause the language to evolve.
 However, Klingon is not quite [yet] a natural language.  We are merely
 studying and trying to learn how to use what we know about it.  Adding
 "innovative" usages in an attempt to compensate for a perceived lack
 in the grammar is rarely a productive endeavor.  It's better to make 
 use of the grammar's strengths instead of dwelling on its weaknesses. >>
  <<pe'>>

jIQochbe'bej.  In all my other arguments, I am not supporting innovative
usages.  I am not saying there is not another way to express a concept in
Klingon.  I am not saying another way would be more efficient.  I am merely
pointing out that TKD 6.2.5 already gives us the answer.

I am trying to learn this language the way matlh and MO have given it to us.
 Until MO himself tells us we should further the development of the language,
I will stick to furthering the development of tlhIngan Hol literature without
agreeing that we should be more interpretative than debating the existing
grammar and vocabulary.

pItlh

peHruS


Back to archive top level