tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri Sep 19 06:48:25 1997

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing



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

Re: Dictionary



On 17 Sep 97 at 22:34, Alan Anderson wrote:

> ja' peSHIr:
> >...The current situation is just about managable (it's on the
> >edge really), but if the amount of Klingon grammar and vocabulary
> >known to us is enlarged any more, a "real", professionally made
> >dictionary and complete grammar description (possibly in the same
> >physical book, but perhaps preferably in two seperate volumes?) is
> >simply essential...
> 
> qatlh mu'ghom law' DamaSHa'?  bIbuD'a'?

HIja'! jIbuDqu'bej... ;-)

> wa' mu'ghom neH DaneHchugh, wa' mu'ghom yIlIng SoH.

wa' mu'ghom vIlIngta'.

That is: I've made three datafiles (DIpmey.tet, wotmey.tet and 
pongmey.tet, with the extension tet being short for tetlh) for the 
word interpreter program I wrote for my personal use.

However, this is not really a dictionary, the format is only
suitable to be used as datafiles for the program (which does only
tlhIngan Hol->English). Also it does not describe (extended) grammar 
like TKD does. And finally I don't even have enough time 
right now to practise my Klingon as much as I would like to, let 
alone have time for making a dictionary for personal use. I still 
need to update my DIPmey and wotmey files with the new 
words from KGT (and the ones from KLI's new words list that I have 
missed before).

Therefore I would applaud a version of TKD that is completely 
updated. Not only for the vocabulary (it would be nice for 
that, but not absolutely vital) but especially for all the grammar 
bits we've come to know since the "addendumized" TKD.

> mu'ghom le' DaghItlhchugh, mu'tay' Daghojbej.

I agree, and I'm all for that. But you need the time for it...

> 'ach loQ jIQochbe' je: lI'chu' pab naQ Delbogh ghItlh chu'.
> 
> The number of separate word lists is presently quite small and
> managable. TKD proper, TKD addendum, KGT, and the KLI-maintained
> miscellany contain *all* the vocabulary we know.  If you want it
> more convenient than that, do it yourself.  It's a great way to
> learn the words.  Besides, are you sure you want a "professionally
> made dictionary" that will -- we hope -- keep getting out of date? 

That would be a problem, yes. And unless the interest in Klingon 
drops to zero very soon (and I do not see that happening at all) this 
will be a problem we will never be able to circumvent (except perhaps 
If Paramount would come with something for computers, that could be 
updated).

> I prefer my personal pocket dictionary, which I can keep current and
> reprint when I feel like it.

Of course. I would too, if I had one. If I already had such a 
dictionary (current up to KGT, or even with just everything in 
TKD+addendum in it) I would make every effort to keep it as up to 
date as possible and use that. For people who do not have such a 
private dictionary already, the threshold to start making one will 
get bigger and bigger when more information is known, spread out over 
more different physical sources. In short: if we get to know even 
more words, grammar, proverbs, cultural and regional background, etc. 
as good as nobody will ever bother to start to make dictionaries of 
their own. And then a complete, updated dictionary is really needed.

> Though I do think a new presentation of the grammar, including the
> minor clarifications, nuances, and examples that we've received over
> the years, would be a very good thing.

I agree. This is almost more important than an updated dictionary.
 
Qapla'
peSHIr

Jarno Peschier, computer science student, Utrecht University
   mailto:[email protected]    http://jarno.home.ml.org/
____________________________________________________________
    'avwI' nejDI' narghta'bogh qama' reH 'avwI' Sambej


Back to archive top level