tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Mar 11 16:38:45 2002

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: jIH vIchuHlu' - Words mentioned earlier but not in the

Will..

Thanks for this.. I realise what it took to bother Marc.. I just wish people
couldn't get away with bending the truth the way Keith did..  He could have
just stopped at acknowledging advice from MO but saying the list was vetted
by Mo was what made me really wonder.

qavan..

qe'San
----- Original Message -----
From: <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 11, 2002 5:36 PM
Subject: Re: jIH vIchuHlu' - Words mentioned earlier but not in the


> As keeper of the New Words List, I've made one of my extremely rare
contacts
> with Okrand. I REALLY don't like bothering him. This is the first time
I've
> contacted him in several years.
>
> Anyway, he confirms that there was some limited communication about the
> vocabulary of the novel. All the words came from Keith, mostly from the
Star
> Trek Encyclopedia (with their unpronounceable spellings) and a few words
that
> were just like we thought they were, existing words with a couple affixes
> thrown on. All of the definitions are Keith's.
>
> The only thing Okrand provided were spellings using his Romanized alphabet
we
> use so commonly. He mentioned that he wasn't sure whether he'd be helping
me or
> hindering me in terms of what really belongs on the New Words list because
of
> items like {Qang}, which already means "chancellor", but Keith used it to
refer
> to a class of battleship. Likely, nobody else has used that word for a
class of
> battleship except that one author in that one book. Do I put in an entry
> because of that?
>
> I'm not inclined to. The fictional history of the Star Trek world is very
> splintered, between movies, several TV series, novels, cartoons, posters,
and
> those commemorative plates, chess sets, etc. I don't really feel like I
want to
> chase down every splinter. I think those entries are more appropriately
> recorded in The Extended Corpus Project. I'd prefer to stick to words that
> Okrand was a little more instrumental in providing to us.
>
> Most likely, I'll add Okrand's spelling of Stovokor and leave it at that
until
> Okrand gets back to me (IF he gets back to me) on the specific items on
the
> list. He can't get to that right now. qay'be'. I'm not interested in
annoying
> the man.
>
> Stuff like this feels like I'm deeply engaged in a really interesting card
game
> with friends who have been into the game for a long time, and there are
these
> annoying people who don't want to learn how to play, but they want to keep
> adding their cards to the deck, and they wonder why the players aren't
thrilled
> about the idea.
>
> Will
>
> > ja' Lawrence:
> > >Your memory of the specifics is better than mine, so correct me if I
blur the
> > >actual events.
> >
> > I can't correct the record of anything I didn't see.
> >
> > >...I told [Keith} to
> > >send me a list of any other items he needed for his book when he got
back to
> > >New York and he did so.
> > >
> > >Now here's where my memory is fuzzy. In all likelihood I farmed out
this list
> > >for input from various Grammarians. That's what I usually do in such
cases,
> > >sometimes just for input, sometimes for extended discussion (depending
on
> > >whether or not the first round of inputs are in agreement). The results
were
> > >then passed on to Keith.
> >
> > I didn't see a list.  All I knew was that he needed a word for
"conquered"
> > that didn't imply slavery.  (I still like {lujwI'}, by the way.)
> >
> > -- ghunchu'wI' 'utlh
> >
>
>

Back to archive top level