tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Thu Aug 05 09:26:41 1999
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: *muSHa'* yImuSHa'!
- From: Carleton Copeland <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: *muSHa'* yImuSHa'!
- Date: Thu, 5 Aug 1999 20:27:12 +-400
- Encoding: 41 TEXT
jatlh charghwI' 'utlh:
> It sounds a lot to me like, "Oh yeah? So you don't like
> {muSHa'}? Well, I DARE you to tell me that love is not the
> supreme emotion!" You challenged me to discard tera'ngan
> romantic notions of love as the supreme emotion. If you didn't
> think this was a nearly impossible task and certainly an
> unlikely case, then where is the challenge?
Why are you so intent on taking this personally? It was an *open*
challenge. If the boot doesn't fit, don't hobble around in it yelling
bloody murder!
> the disparate meanings that have been arbitrarily assembled
> under the heading "love" in English do not deserve to be
> represented by a single word in ANY language. It was a
> mistake to do it in English and that mistake should not be
> reproduced in Klingon.
I suppose the word *love* may be as much a mistake of human cultural
evolution as humans are a mistake of Terran physical evolution. We're all
screwed up, sure, but in some sense we've proved our fitness.
> Would a lazy suitor recite bad poetry and dodge heavy objects?
> Would a lazy suitor endure the physical injury implicit in
> parmaq? If you were as lazy and careless in your actions as in
> your speech while courting a Klingon woman, you'd be removed
> from the gene pool by a Darwinian filter.
And if everyone were as clear and precise as you'd like them to be, poetry
and parmaq would be no more than calculated exchanges of data and bodily
fluids.
*Love* is a fuzzy word for a fuzzy phenomenon.
> tlhIngan SoH! tlhIngan maH!
There's another thing you got right!
qa'ral