tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Wed Aug 04 09:41:48 1999

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: *muSHa'* yImuSHa'!

On Wed, 4 Aug 1999 04:27:16 -0400 Carleton Copeland 
<[email protected]> wrote:

> jatlh Pillow:
> 
> > I've seen people use <muSHa'> to mean something like <love> If
> > muSbe' means "not hate" consequently does muSHa' mean love?
> 
> 
> I couldn't let this pass without putting in another plug for <muSHa'>.

I guess that prompts me to put in another plug for dissention.
 
> !!! Disclaimer:  <muSHa'> as a translation of *to love* is non-canon (never 
> used by MO).  <muSHa'> is not the exact equivalent of DIvI' Hol *to love* 
> (neither are *aimer* *lieben* or *liubit'*, for that matter).  maghwI' ghaH 
> mughwI''e' net Sov.

I don't see how ANY verb in ANY language could be an exact 
equivalent to "love" in English, since that verb is so vague as 
to be meaningless.

I love my car. I love to speak Klingon. I love contra dancing. I 
love really good chocolate. I love my guitar. I love playing my 
guitar. I love my mother and sister, though that has nothing to 
do with romance. Trust me on this. There is no romance in my 
life, so by another meaning the word, I love no one and nobody 
loves me. But on the dance floor, I love everybody and everybody 
loves me.

A number of people here on this list love to argue.

Households where spouse abuse is commonplace involve people who 
claim to love one another. Stalkers say they love their prey. 
The guy who made news recently shooting all those day-traders 
bludgened his wife and two children to death in their sleep and 
wrote notes about how much he loved them.

The word is not important. Being willing to make personal 
sacrifice in order to improve the lives of those one cares for 
is a lot more important than the use of the word "love". Action 
is more important than words. That is very Klingon.

So just to make things more clear, I am less bothered by the 
word {muSHa'} than I am by the word "love" that drove people 
like you to come up with {muSHa'} in the first place. The word 
and its perverse use in our culture does not justify infecting 
the Klingon language with a mirror word.

My problem is that {muSHa'} as you propose it is not a word for 
the Klingon language. Instead, it is an encoding of the English 
word "love" so that {muSHa'} can be as mindlessly and 
meaninglessly used in Klingon as the word "love" is mindlessly 
and meaninglessly used in English.
 
> That said, I am the founder and sole member of the unofficial <muSHa'> fan 
> club within the Klingon Language Institute.  Our motto is:  <*muSHa'* 
> yImuSHa'!>.
 
Ummm. If you are the only member, then you probably should say, 
"My motto is..." instead of "Our motto is..." Meanwhile, I doubt 
you are the soul member. Krankor sincerely likes the term and I 
respect him greatly.
 
> The <muSHa'> Lovers' Manifesto (Draft)
> 
> peqIm!
> 
> <muSHa'> deserves your first consideration whenever a Klingon verb for 
> *love* is required!    qatlh?

My point is that it is never required. There is always a 
clearer, more honest way to say whatever you are trying to say 
with the word {muSHa'}. Do I have to prove this again? Every 
time I've tried before, I got responses that I succeeded in 
showing how excellently Klingon can convey various forms of love 
without any need whatsoever of the word.
 
> 1) <muSHa'> allows Klingons to *love*, a verb which is otherwise absent 
> from the known Klingon vocabulary.

Are you trying to say that if the Klingon doesn't have a word 
for "slip" a Klingon can't slip on ice or bannana peels? If the 
language doesn't have a word for "vomit" that they can't vomit? 
If there is no word for "burp", then they can't burp?
 
> 2) <muSHa'> has won the recognition (though not the love) of most 
> pabpo'pu'.  It received a powerful endorsement on this list from no less 
> than HoD Qanqor, pabpo' wa'DIch. 
>  (/tlhIngan-Hol/1999/Jul99/0194.html)

Quite true. Meanwhile, I long endorsed {'arlogh} before we got 
the word, but until Okrand confirmed it, I did not declare it to 
be valid.
 
> 3) <muSHa'> jibes with the *Do the opposite of* sense of <-Ha'>--recently 
> recognized as the most common function of this suffix. 
>  (/tlhIngan-Hol/1999/Jul99/0365.html)

Ahhh, but what exactly IS the opposite of "hate"? Since hate 
involves a passionate focus of attention, could the opposite of 
hate be totally dispassionate indifference? If I hate something, 
that is pretty much the opposite of thinking that it is silly, 
so could the opposite of hating something be thinking that it is 
silly? I could consider that to hate something is to have that 
thing cause me to want to fight, and prolonged dysentery 
definitely makes me not want to fight, so should I consider that 
the opposite of "hate" is to consider something to be similar to 
dysentery? There are many possible opposites to "hate". There is 
only one cliche opposite to hate. Does Klingon have to abide by 
an English cliche?
 
> 4) <muSHa'> makes a provocative "cultural statement," as charghwI' (not a 
> <muSHa'> fan) has pointed out.  <muSHa'> along with <parHa'>, <tungHa'>, 
> and <nItebHa'> evoke a culture in which hating, disliking, discouraging, 
> and acting alone are more primary than their opposites.

It is a passionate culture, not so much a pleasant, polite one. 
It is also one that admires accuracy and doesn't value vagueness.
 
> We challenge those who find <muSHa'> outside their comfort zone to jettison 
> tera'ngan romantic notions of love as the supreme emotion.  wejpuH!

There is no romantic love in my life right now, yet I have 
PLENTY of emotion. Most of my emotions are positive. I enjoy 
life. Meanwhile, my life is not on hold while I yearn for 
resolution to a crushing need to fulfill the partnership that 
your "supreme" emotion requires.

American culture revealed by its media worships romantic love. 
It also worships commercialism and materialism. Lives can be 
quite valid and valuable without these things. Many of us are 
not rich or attractive. Should we just hopelessly march off a 
cliff like lemmings because we don't look like movie stars and 
we don't own all the right things as defined by the media?

Get a brain.

As truely scentient beings with a plethora of WIDELY 
VARIED available experiences there is no single "supreme" 
emotion. You disrespect the vast majority of people and their 
experiences by defining how insignificant their chosen paths are 
when compared to one that you particularly like.

I have richly enjoyed romantic bonds in my past. I'm quite open 
to enjoying a new one in my future, but right now I'm quite busy 
enjoying other stuff and frankly, I find it insulting to be told 
that the stuff I'm enjoying is inferior to your "supreme" 
emotion.

The word "love" represents a perverse assembly of emotions that 
really don't belong together all that well. Even if you include 
the full range of emotion for which the word is used, THERE IS 
SO MUCH MORE TO FEEL THAN JUST LOVE, and these other things are 
exactly as valid and meaningful. Respect them. You may 
eventually find yourself needing them if "love" fails to serve 
your needs in perpetuity.

Divest. Respect diversity. Infinite Diversity in Infinite 
Combination. IDIC. The Vulcans have something there. Respect the 
concept. Open your mind as well as your heart. Respecting 
healthier forms of "love" is a good thing, but disrespecting 
everything else is not.
 
> *muSHa'* yImuSHa'!

ram.
 
> pItlh.

'e' vIHon.
 
> qa'ral

charghwI' 'utlh

Back to archive top level