tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Fri Feb 22 08:56:24 2002
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
- From: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Subject: Re: qelI'qam
- Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2002 13:56:24 GMT
> From: "Alan Anderson" <email@example.com>
> > ja' SuStel:
> > >Can someone point me to any place in Okrand's writings where he specifies
> > >the length of a /qelI'qam/? I see a claim of approximately 2 kilometers
> > >various fan pages on the Internet, but I'd like to know if Okrand agrees
> > >with this.
> > The source of the conversion factor is Star Trek Encyclopedia. Whether or
> > not Marc Okrand agrees, he apparently accommodates it.
> And how does he accommodate it? Do you mean he hasn't contradicted it?
> Stardate 2144.1
Okrand seems reluctant to deal with measurements most of the time. I once asked
him how many 'ujmey in a qelI'qam, offering that he could answer it later so he
wouldn't feel pressured to answer it on the spot. I even offered a couple of
the more round numbers that approximate our current understandings of these
He dodged the question basically saying that a Klingon doesn't mix qelI'qammey
and 'ujmey. They are measurements of different scales and Klingons don't note
one in terms of the other.
I was disappointed in the answer, though it does seem to fit the "A Klingon may
be inaccurate, but he is never approximate" aspect of the Klingon culture.
Perhaps Klingons don't have a real standard length for an 'uj or a qelI'qam.
Maybe Klingon 'uj measuring rulers vary by 5% and nobody cares. Maybe qelI'qam
odometers vary by 5% and nobody cares. This would explain why we don't have
exact translation equivalents to plug into our calculators.
Maybe this is why Klingon uniforms tend to fit rather loosely...