tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sun Nov 17 17:40:20 2002

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

Re: QeD De'wI' ngermey

>> That's why we can't do it outside individual posts.  We're supposed to be
>> studying Klingon, not inventing it.

ja' "...Paul" <>:
>What of Klingon is there to "study"?  There is very limited source
>material to work from.  If you were to really study a language, such as
>English, you look into things like etymology and the evolution of the
>language over time.  You look into things like "When did the past tense of
>'sneak' change from 'sneaked' to 'snuck'?" or "How did the silent e rule
>drop from words like 'faire'?"

Hol vIghojDI' jIH, 'oH vIjatlhlaH.  Hol qun vIbuSbe'.  Hol choHmey
vIbuSbe'.  Hol'e' vIbuS.  wa' ngoQ potlhlaw' Hoch potlh puS:  maja'chuqlaH.

You're talking about the kind of study that is *about* a language.  We're
-- mostly -- trying to study the language itself.  The goal is not to
become an expert *on* Klingon, but to become an expert *in* Klingon.

>But what if I want to translate or author something that includes concepts
>not currently covered by the Klingon language?

loS wIvmey vIlegh.
wa':  qechmeylIjvaD lI'be' tlhIngan Hol 'e' yIlaj.  Qu' yIlon.
cha':  qechmeylIjvaD mu'mey lo'mey joq tI'ogh.
wej:  qechmeylIjvaD mu'mey lo'mey joq yIpoQ.
loS:  qechmeylIj tIbuSQo'.  Hol naQ yIHaD.  mu'tay'lIj yIghurmoHtaH.
tagha' mu'mey lo'mey joq DaneHbogh Daghov ... pagh tagha' DuHbe' Qu'lIj 'e'

It looks to me like you have four options.

1 - Abandon the task.  Accept that Klingon cannot be used to express what
you want to say.

2 - Invent usage for what you require.

3 - Whine and nag and petition for the kinds of terms you need.

4 - Keep working on your skills with the language in general, improving
your vocabulary and your understanding, until either you figure out how to
say what you want, or until you recognize that there is a true gap in the
language in that area.

>If we have no hopes of the language being anything more than a toy for
>fans of Star Trek or an amusement for people interested in "secret
>languages", the hardline is fine.  But it also means we can't write any
>creative fiction that might possibly make use of metaphor (for what is
>metaphor but the creation of idioms?)

Qo'.  pab ru' chaw'lu'bej.  jatmey yIlaD.  lutmey Dun Datu'bej.

Metaphor is not creation of idioms.  Metaphor is description using terms
which are not necessarily literally applicable.  Idioms are either
cultural/historical references or *established* non-literal descriptions;
in both cases, they rely on a shared framework of existing ideas.

Have you read anything published in jatmey?  *I* think there's plenty of
creative fiction there, metaphors and all. :-)

>nor can we make reference to
>anything outside the scope of the language.

wejpuH.  qech DellaHbe'chugh Hol, vaj qech DellaHbe'ba' Hol lo'bogh nuv.  So?

That of course depends on what you mean by "scope of the language".  I'd
certainly agree that you can't say anything in a language if that thing
can't be said in that language, but of what use is such an observation?

>How much can we study
>something that doesn't change?  What we're really doing is not studying
>Klingon, we're practicing it.

maj.  Hol DaSovchu'DI', DaHaD 'e' yImev.  ngugh yIqeq neH.  'ach Hol
DaSovchu'pa', DaHaD 'e' yImevQo'qu'.

Fine -- once you've studied it enough to know it all, then you can stop
studying  and just keep practicing.  Until you reach that

>But what future does the language have if
>it doesn't grow and adapt?

Hol taHmoH wa' Doch neH:  lo'lu'.  Hol SachmoH lo'wI'Daj.  Hol SIgh je
lo'wI'Daj.  [rut bong wISIgh, mu'tlheghHommey DImaStaHvIS.]  mu'mey lo'mey
je DI'oghQo'chugh, wIvuSlu'law' net leghlaH...'ach nuvuSbejbe' Hol HeHmey.
tlhopmajDaq HeH wIleghtaHvIS, tut wIchenmoHlaH.  nuvuSbe' chal'e'!

Its future is assured by only one thing: its users.  The language grows by
being used.  It "adapts" by our using certain patterns which we end up
promoting to the exclusion of other patterns.  If we refuse to extend it,
then we can see its limits -- but we can also see that we're nowhere near
actually being limited anytime soon unless we intentionally choose
particular directions.

Someone ought to catalog the stages through which Klingon language students
go.  I recognize your points as being the ones I put forth about six years
ago or more.  They are valid, but I also believe they are irrelevant to
your desire to write a tutorial on data structures.

-- ghunchu'wI'

Back to archive top level