tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Tue Sep 07 16:57:32 1999

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

RE: Questions and possibly some KLBC:

jatlh muchwI' maw':

>>>>>

Hi all,

My name is Alessio but you can call me muchwI' maw' (pagh, check this
please).
I am not new to the list but this is very much my first real post.
I am doing some research on artificial languages and lately I have been
interested in the way artificial languages are developed.
I was wondering about how the Klingon Language is expanded... as far as I
gathered Mark Okrand (and his staff, if he has any) is the only person who
can officially expand/correct/make changes to the KL, right ?
Can anyone provide me with more information ?
Secondly, I'd like to know what the people in this list think about being
"forced" to work only with the tools that are provided by Okrand. Do you
sometimes feel the need to expand the languages by yourselves ? Do you feel,
as active users of KL,  you have the right to ? Do you think the KL would
benefit from a descriptive/cooperative approach to language development ?
On the other hand, is there anyone who thinks that MO prescriptions are the
best way to ensure a fluid and non-ambiguous development of the KL (which
may as well turn it into an "unnatural" language anyway) ?

I know it might take some time to answer to these questions. That's why I am
suggesting that you might be sending private answers to my e-mail address
and
take your time with them. That would also spare other people in the list
from reading this non-sense chatter.

Please, I need as many answers/opinions as I can get. That would be really
important.
You might as well choose not to help me but remember that...

>>>>>

The answer is quite simple: even though Klingon is clearly a constructed
language, we choose to treat it differently. We treat Klingon as if it were
a natural language spoken by a group of people to whom we have very limited
access. Although we are clearly aware Marc Okrand is the creator of the
language, we often treat him like the one researcher who is studying the
language. 

Is all this rather silly? Definitely. But it does a wonderful thing. It
(usually) forces us to *use* the language, not debate about it. If there is
never any temptation to extend the language, the that's not something we
need to stress over. We can get on with our lives and converse in this
wonderful language.

> not maroj tlhIngan qoj malIj

I see the idea you're going for, but Klingon conjunctions don't quite work
this way. The translation for the phrase "Buy or die!", for example, is
<bIje'be'chugh vaj bIHegh>. Also, what exactly are we forgetting here? In
light of this:

not marojchugh vaj tlhIngan maH not 'e' wIlIj.

If we never make peace, then we will never forget we are Klingons!

> See ya.
> muchwI' maw'

ponglIj yIQIj. wIvmeH mIwlIj yIDel.
Your name is fine. Explain it. Describe your process for choosing it.


pagh
Beginners' Grammarian

tlhIngan Hol Mailing List FAQ
http://www.bigfoot.com/~dspeers/klingon/faq.htm

Back to archive top level