tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri Nov 26 13:56:03 1999

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing



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

Re: cardinal directions



On Fri, 26 Nov 1999 07:22:57 -0800 Ben Gibson 
<[email protected]> wrote:

> "Mark E. Shoulson" wrote:
> > 
> > >Date: Tue, 23 Nov 1999 09:28:04 -0600
> > >From: Terrence Donnelly <[email protected]>
> > >
> > >If you put <chan> at the top of your map, then the compass
> > >rose for the three cardinal points looks remarkably like the
> > >Klingon trefoil!
> > 
> > I truly doubt that was a coincidence.
> > 
> > Actually, I rolled my eyes at this chan/'ev/tIng thing...
> > Maybe there are places
> > that use a 3-way deal like Klingon. 

jISaHbe'. mIw pIm lo' Satlh pIm.

> > But hey, we have it, and I even get my
> > "East", which I needed both for Jonah and the Tower of Babel translations.
> > 
> > ~mark
> 
> I too rolled my eyes when I read this. It appears that such
> a coordinate system would be very inefficient, as it would
> require a minimum of 3 numbers to describe a point on a map.
> (For further clarification, one may look at how location of
> Klin Zha pieces are demarked.)

If you happen to have any Klin Zha pieces handy. I'm fresh out, 
myself.

> Our present system requires
> only two. Four cardinal points in 2 dimensions yields only 2
> numbers, whereas 3 cardinal points in 2 dimensions require 3
> numbers.

What do you mean by this? Latitude and longitude? Giving more 
context will make your meaning more clear.

I think you are making a lot of assumptions here on how things 
have to work. We have four compass points actually referring to 
bidirectional travel along two axis and count each direction of 
travel as a separate direction (while we could have used 
negative East numbers instead of West numbers, giving us only 
two directions, say East and North, implying Uneast or Negative 
East and Unnorth or Negative North). Meanwhile, we relate all 
this to the equator and an arbitrary longitude line as zero and 
count 360 degrees to the circle either way. All this numbering 
is arbitrary.

Klingons might similarly use two directions that don't happen to 
be at 90 degrees to one another, and they can start numbering at 
a pole instead of the equator. The glob would have spiralling 
lines along tIng and 'ev. There are so many different 
"numbering" systems that could be used on a map and Okrand said 
nothing of numbers being used with these three terms. I think 
you are making assumptives leaps that are not productive.

I think it is more interesting that if I wanted to say "North" 
and the three points had been at 120 degrees, then 'ev chan 'ev 
would be due North. As it is, it will be slightly West of North. 
The main thing this indicates is that Klingons do not have any 
special sense of orientation to the poles.

> However I think there may be a way out. It is noted that the
> Hur'Iq invaded Qo'noS some thousand years ago and thanks to
> that, tlhInganpu' "stole" warp drive as well as most of the
> technology and science. It appears to mimic the situation in
> Poul Anderson's "High Crusade". What Okrand is talking about
> is the old way of doing things, prior to that invasion. Back
> before Qo'noS and the Hol was corrupted.

Here on modern Earth, we have number systems for maps, but when 
we talk about directions, we much more commonly use the words 
"North, South, East, West" which are far less precise, but they 
generally work well most of the time. Why do you disallow 
Klingons from a similar practice?
 
> Granted this is a bit of speculation. But the general idea
> is that you have a rather primitive culture thrust into
> cosmic arena. And at present in ST time, (which is our
> future. No wonder tlhIngan don't worry about tense), there
> is a bit of a nostalgia movement in the culture. Going back
> to the original Hol,

So, when I say New York is North of Virginia, I'm being 
nostalgic?
 
> Oh well just an idea.
> 
> Ben (DraQoS)

charghwI'



Back to archive top level