tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sat May 12 20:14:06 2001
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: *Paramount* chaw'
David Trimboli wrote:
> but who are you? (And compared to the size of the language--having been
> around since 1985 and being used on every continent, who are any of us?)
I'm nobody. I bought my first TKD in 1986 and considered learning the
language then, but I thought that would make me a little too geeky.
Last year I found that others actually did learned it, I decided to
tackle it too. I quickly realized I needed to buy not only KGT, but
also a new TKD with the addendum. (I'm sure Marc only added all these
words for the good of the language, not for any monetary reasons...
:-)
> If you're going to ignore corny puns in the language, you're going to have
> to dump about a third of the language.
I didn't say this, I said I didn't like chang'eng. To use Klingon, I
don't have to refer to a carnival sideshow act. And by the way, I can
understand its meaning when someone else uses it without actually using
it myself. If others like the word, more power to them, I can only
speak for myself. Ditto for someone else's new word. I can choose to
like it or not, and so can everyone else.
> As for what words
> are "necessary," that depends on what you want to say, doesn't it?
Doesn't this go without saying? As I've said before, I'm a Scouter, and
one of the first things I wanted to do was write something about a
camping trip. I quickly gave up because it ended up being largely
English since I could find no words for camping, tent, axe, fishing,
knots, marshmallows, etc. What's the point of speaking Klingon if half
your words are English. I could have used incredibly convoluted Klingon
explanations for the words but that seemed terribly pedantic. Note
however, that I did not presume to make up words for these myself. Had
someone else done so, I may have chosen to use them, or I may not have.
I am only a lonely peon, and Marc Okrand is God. I don't think a true
Klingon would have bothered with either possibility. However, I *DID*
notice that at least three of you who have been flaming me boasted of
having had their own made-up words approved by Okrand. Apparently you
are better people than the new chap who wants to make up his own word.
How dare he?
> It IS used: by Klingons.... But there ARE no real Klingons
Your response becomes confusing here because you argue both sides as it
pleases you. But it seems to boil down to this:
> To maintain the fiction that what we're speaking is a real language spoken
> by Klingons, one MUST agree that only Marc Okrand has access to a Klingon
> informant. Otherwise we'll all begin speaking a different language.
Yes, we are suspending disbelief to study this noble race. Why then
should we believe that only Okrand has access? Surely we star voyagers
may once in a while come across Klingons using unfamiliar words. (At
least three of you have, by your own admition.) It's okay if not
everyone understands it. Okrand even admits that some dialects are
somewhat unintelligible to others across the Empire. If the new guy
discovers a word, more power to him. If you choose not to use it, more
power to you. Call it a dialect of an unimportant House.
Will Martin wrote:
> if you think you are the first...to suggest revolution...
I'm not trying to start a revolution, Will. I'm not even trying to
propose a new word. But even Cherokee and Turkish have continued to
evolve despite systemization and legislation.
William Bowlsby wrote:
>> industrious souls in our midst have claimed Shakespeare as their
>> own, reworking it in this very language.
> Just because one cane do a thing does not mean it should be done that way.
I agree.
> Yes a name is a word. But it does not need to really mean
> anything. Worf, Martok, Gowron, etc. etc. etc.
But they *DO* mean something. When you say 'Worf' you are referring to
a very specific thing and everyone on this list understands exactly what
that word means. When I say 'qoraQ' I am also referring to a very
specific thing, but only a select few may instantly recognize what this
word means. Others may be able to deduce from context what type of
thing it refers to, but perhaps not which specific one. Perhaps a
name's derivation is lost in the mists of time, but it still means
something today. Try writing a story without names.
QIS