tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sun May 23 15:03:29 1999

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: tlhIngan De'wI'mey (was Re: KLBC)

ja'pu' quljIb:
 Knowing Klingons, they probably built in the same multiple redundancies
>that make Klingon physiology so unique...

ja' Voragh:
>Perhaps not.  In some of the novels, Klingons have sneered at these
>multiple redundancies in Federation technology considering them unnecessary
>and, probably more relevant, expensive luxuries.

jIQochbe'.  bIraqlul lo' yIn'e'; qatlh rapnIS cham?
pupbe'mo' qo' 'ej pupbe'mo' cham, yIn Qan bIraqlul.
cham Davuvbe'chugh, yIDugh neH.  cham cha'DIch yIchelQo' jay'!

>I vaguely remember one
>Klingon commenting on the quadruple (!) redundancies of Federation
>personnel transporters, "Are they so afraid of dying?"  It does seem odd in
>view of the brak'lul {bIraqlul}.

In "The Final Reflection", the Klingons were quite amused at the extra
redundancy of the Federation transporters, because it gave such a small
measure of extra safety at the cost of making noise during the transport
process.  (In the episode "Day of the Dove", the Klingons beamed silently
and surprised the landing party.  Ford did an *amazing* job of explaining
almost every detail of Klingon philosophy and technology that was hinted
at in TOS.)

>One thing several people have remarked upon is that Klingon computers don't
>seem to use a voice interphase, unlike Federation, Vulcan and Cardassian
>computers.  At least I don't think we've ever seen a Klingon computer
>speak to its operator.  (Have we ever seen a Klingon issue an oral command
>to a computer aboard a Klingon ship?)

I think the closest we have is Valkris' apparent command to the data
tranceiving device aboard the other ship:  {HablI', Su': labbeH!}

-- ghunchu'wI'

Back to archive top level