tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri Mar 27 10:52:31 1998

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: How big is the vocabulary?

Obviously, I need to straighten out my sources in my database,
but I'll offer my numbers for comparison. [charghwI']

According to Alan Anderson:
> 
> ja' qelayn:
> >3400? I thought I had all (most) of the words on my computer totalling
> >just over 2100 words, where did these other words come from?
> >Are they all constructs from speakers or are they official?

I have 2309 words, names and phrases total in my database. I
probably have slightly different numbers for my other
dictionaries.

> My carefully-maintained word list contains 2310 entries, taken from 
> TKD, KGT, and charghwI''s "new word list" on the web.  There are a 
> handful of semi-duplicates where TKD gives different definitions in 
> the two halves of the lexicon, or significant additional explanation
> from the word list in KGT, etc.  I also have a personal addendum with 
> a few non-words, mostly names, but including some entries that are of
> historical and/or humorous value.
> 
> A brief check of my sources yields the following breakdown:
>  1501 from TKD
>   186 from TKD's addendum

While I set up my database to keep these separated, when I did
actual entry, I apparently combined them for 1525 words in TKD
and its addendum.

>   604 from KGT

I counted 570 words.

>     7 from veS QonoS

I put these in with other {HolQeD} words, which total 17.

>    10 from the Star Trek: Klingon CD

I counted 6.

>     2 direct from Marc Okrand but not otherwise listed

I counted 169 from CK (this is obviously a mistake), 7 from PK,
4 proper names, 2 from Sarek, 1 from TKW, and 8 from MSN.

I suspect my Pilot list has the categories more accurately
portrayed, but in general, I need to go back and clean this up.

> Even though things like {targh tIq} and {qeylIS mInDu'} are made of 
> readily translatable parts, they are in my list because they have
> specific "cultural" meanings.  I also include obvious constructions
> like {yoHwI'} "brave one" when they're listed in an official lexicon.

Counting words is so arbitrary. Do proper names count? We
basically accept that {ghojmoH} is a separate word from {ghoj}
and {vIHmoH} is not a separate word from {vIH} simply because
we have a separate English word for "teach" and "learn", but we
don't have separate English words for "it moved" and "I moved
it".

Still, I guess it is a good geek thing to do. Computers can
count really fast, so why not compare numbers?

> -- ghunchu'wI'

charghwI'

Back to archive top level