tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sun Nov 17 09:53:35 2002
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: QeD De'wI' ngermey
- From: "David Trimboli" <email@example.com>
- Subject: Re: QeD De'wI' ngermey
- Date: Sun, 17 Nov 2002 10:55:48 -0500
>From: "...Paul" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
>Basically, making up new words is generally bad. We're not allowed.
>Making compound nouns is bad. We're not allowed to do that, either.
>But are we allowed to start building our own idiomatic speech? Most
>of the English terms used in computer science are effectively
>idiomatic uses of existing words: procedure, function, pointer,
>stack, queue, list, reference, counter, object, class, structure,
>union... Really, there are very few additions to the language. Since
>Klingons obviously have computers, and obviously they're advanced,
>it seems like we should be able to discuss computer science using the
>language. While I suppose it's possible Klingons could've invented
>a completely new word for "virtual class", isn't it just as likely
>they would've just started using existing language constructs and
>words to describe such concepts?
Did YOU coin the special meanings of the words "stack," "queue," and so
forth in English? If you did, I see no reason why you can't do so in
If you didn't, then what makes your decisions for new idioms like that
binding? What if *I* wanted to challenge your choices? I'm a grammarian,
you're not. Do I win?
That's why we can't do it outside individual posts. We're supposed to be
studying Klingon, not inventing it.
Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*.