tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Nov 26 19:36:55 1997
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: KGT new words
- From: "David Trimboli" <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: KGT new words
- Date: Wed, 26 Nov 1997 13:03:58 -0500
-----Original Message-----
From: Alan Anderson <[email protected]>
To: Multiple recipients of list <[email protected]>
Date: Tuesday, November 25, 1997 9:56 PM
Subject: Re: KGT new words
>I actually find a sort of perverse humor in the fact that we discovered the
>word {tuq} immediately after _Hamlet_ was published. I'm not sure whether
>or not {mI'} showed up in time to make it into _paghmo' tIn mIS_, but I'd
>be similarly amused if it didn't.
It didn't. I would have *killed* to have {mI'}, {tlhay}, {nguv}, and a few
others from KGT while editing the play! The newest word which made an
appearance is {parmaq}, though most of the play still uses {muSHa'},
{muSHa'ghach}, and other assorted things. (Unless Lawrence and Nick are
making changes they're not telling me about!)
>*I* think enough work was done on Hamlet. It's not perfect. There are
>certainly more appropriate words available now, and I've noticed a couple
>of places where the grammar is a bit odd. (I haven't given much thought
>to changing it without losing the iambic pentameter, though.) But let's
>not start trying to second-guess it just yet, okay?
There's no real need to, anyway. I find it fun to read most of the {Hoch}'s
in Hamlet backwards. The Terran conception of Shakespeare certainly didn't
worry too much about breaking rules, or being consistent, and I'm sure that
was inspired by the writings of the original SeQpIr. It gives it a good
"language in flux" feel.
Most of the {Hoch}'s are fixed in {paghmo' tIn mIS} (though there's still a
good question as to whether {naQ}, which was used, should have been a
following {Hoch} instead). Does this mean we have to go back and fix
Hamlet? No! I'll bet that SeQpIr wrote different plays differently,
according to different styles, dialects, moods, and so forth. Does it mean
we have to keep all {Hoch}'s after the noun in {paghmo' tIn mIS}? No!
In communication skills and grammatical questions, I always advocate
emulating the Klingons as closely as possible. In advanced writing, I think
it's okay to ease up a bit (I think Nick would have a hard time believing
that). After all, we're writing (well, "restoring") fiction for a fictional
culture, not trying to be philologists and linguists. The play's the thing.
(Sorry, had to say that!)
SuStel
Stardate 97904.9