tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Jul 14 10:50:19 2003

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing

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

My 2¢ (was Re: Is the language too bound for its own good? (was Re: Klingon - Terminology Databases (IMHO)))

I have a personal opinion on this subject that is probably vastly
different than the majority, however, in true klingon fashion, I'm going
to speak it and everyone can get over it later =)

  There are many "artificial" languages, but only a handful that have
actually sprung from fiction in any way that is usable for conversation.
Fremen (from Frank Herbert's sci-fi masterpiece Dune) is limited to it's
almost-arabic vocabulary and proverbial constructs. But, the two language
groups that have fared the best in the eyes of the people are the Elven
languages Tolkien devised, and tlhIngan Hol, by Okrand. 
  The differences in the two here are *very* important to my standpoint.
Quenya and Sindarin, both used in the Lord of the Rings trilogy, have
evolved. They've moved beyond what they were (to an extent), and become
what Tolkien envisioned. In fact, in some cases, they're as useful, if
not moreso than Klingon, and they're not even "complete languages".
Quenya has changed very little, being a dead language akin to Latin, but
Sindarin is actively translated every day in message boards and email
listings like this one. Why? Because Tolkien's approach to language is
vastly different than Okrand's. Tokien actually created a past for his
languages, going so far as to outline three different alphabets that were
used "throughout the ages, in succession" as one linguist put it. He
started the evolution of the Elven tongues, so speakers of Sindarin today
can actually go back and create new words as a concensus sees fit, by the
etymology of the words themselves. They have a past, they can dictate the
"evolution" of a term. There are few things they cannot translate.
  Okrand didn't do this, so we rely on him for words. (An image is
conjured up of thousands of Klingons staring at Boreth, waiting for a
message from Kahless himself, only to be left wondering if he'll speak
today) Okrand makes up words as he sees fit, and while this is a good
system, and has been working for roughly 20 years, it will /only/ work
while Okrand lives. When he goes to fight in the Black Fleet, we're
screwed for vocab. lol  Maltz isn't a grand help, either, for he only
serves IC purposes that continue to evade me (most of us consider
ourselves Klingon IC, not tera'ngan, so Maltz really does a
whole-lotta-nothing for those of us who are supposed to be native
speakers within the fiction.) Holding contests to beg Matlz for new vocab
once again conjures that Klingons-staring-at-Boreth image, with the
addition of perhaps a romuluSngan or tribble sacrifice. lol
  Okrand's system, the way it is, works fine as long as he lives. But,
Tolkien is gone, and his language lives on, with new vocabulary added
regularly to his constructed languages. Why? Two reasons. First, he
understood that when he passed, his "children" (he always liked the elves
best) would yearn for the realism of his works, so a semi-complete and
totally workable/speakable language was a must in order to provide that
(after all, he was a linguist himself). Secondly, he gave us something to
base future vocabulary and grammar on, etymology.
  Okrand has given us a similar gift in the second; while we know nothing
of primitive Klingon, we do know about the speakers, and their attitudes,
which would assist "us" in creating vocabulary when our children's
children's decendants speak the warrior tongue, and Maltz has long since
given up his tongue. Klingons don't say "hello." they say "what do you
want?" or immediately state their business. They don't assume you like
something by default (parHa'), they assume you don't (par). Klingons are
rough, crude, yet artistic and intelligent. In the future, that's what
will shape the language, unless Paramount decides to let it die through
selfishness and greed.

My 2¢,
Kash

On Sun, 13 Jul 2003 09:50:50 -0600 "d'Armond Speers" <[email protected]>
writes:
> There are a couple of different ways of looking at this issue, from 
> within 
> the fiction and outside the fiction.
> 
> Within the fiction, we are learning to speak the language of 
> Klingons.  They 
> exist on another planet far away.  We can't go there and learn it; 
> all we 
> can do is learn with what we have, and get occasional information 
> from Maltz 
> (though his Federation interrogator).  Our goal is to speak the 
> language 
> accurately, so that if we do meet a Klingon he can understand us.  
> In this 
> context, we can't change the language to suit our needs.  We don't 
> want to 
> speak "Terran-Klingon."  If we start adding words, we're not 
> speaking 
> Klingon any more.  (As for a lack of vocabulary, there's no reason 
> that 
> Klingon should have words for Terran concepts such as "dog" or 
> "truffle" 
> since they don't exist, we assume, on Kronos.)
> 
> Outside the fiction, this is a language created for a TV show.  Its 
> legal 
> status is unclear, and though we believe Paramount would not win a 
> legal 
> contest, practically speaking noone has the resources to challenge 
> them. 
> Regarding Okrand, he is still an active and willing participant with 
> the 
> community.  If he were ignoring us or didn't care about Klingon then 
> I'd be 
> more interested in figuring out how the KLI can continue to develop 
> the 
> language, but this isn't the case.
> 
> Whichever perspective you prefer, I disagree with the statement "You 
> can't 
> use it in daily life, especially with having little to no words 
> about daily 
> items and too much confusion about pronunciation and grammar.  We 
> don't 
> learn it because it's not allowed to be anything more than a fake 
> language."
> 
> First, there is no confusion about pronunciation.  For most 
> practical 
> purposes, there is no confusion about the grammar.  And even the 
> vocabulary 
> is sufficiently rich to handle most anything you want to say, as 
> long as you 
> don't expect Klingon to have a word things like "taco."  There's 
> nothing 
> wrong with Klingon lacking these words.  What's the English word for 
> "taco"? 
> We don't have one, so we just say "taco."  You don't need a Klingon 
> word for 
> it.
> 
> Every day, the speakers on this list prove that you can use this 
> language. 
> Just come to a qep'a', and see how people who have put in the effort 
> to 
> learn the language can speak it.  The problem here is your friend's 
> perception, not any shortcoming of the language itself.  Adding 
> grammar and 
> vocabulary that make it easier for an English speaker to learn to 
> speak 
> Klingon will not do anything to improve or advance the Klingon 
> language 
> itself.
> 
> If you need to say "coffee-girl," what's wrong with saying 
> {qa'vIn-be'}?  Of 
> course you can say this.  I may not understand what you mean, but 
> I'm not 
> sure what "coffee-girl" means in the first place.  Will you find it 
> in TKD? 
> Nope, but that doesn't mean we need to suddenly complain that 
> Klingon is a 
> "fake" language and try to change the grammar/vocab.  We play games 
> like 
> this with the language all the time, and we understand each other 
> just fine. 
> It's usually people who don't know how to use the tools of the 
> language who 
> complain that it doesn't have the right tools, because they don't 
> match the 
> tools they're used to using for English.  Learning Klingon is about 
> learning 
> to use new tools (grammar/vocab), and it's not easy.  I would have 
> more 
> respect for the opinion of your friend who complained about 
> Klingon's lack 
> of expressiveness if he could already use Klingon well enough to 
> participate 
> in a simple conversation (or pass the Intermediate/Advanced KLCP 
> exams). 
> Until he can do that, he hasn't earned the right to complain about 
> what 
> Klingon lacks.
> 
> --
> d'Armond Speers, Ph.D.
> [email protected]
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Klingon Warrior" <[email protected]>
> To: <[email protected]>
> Sent: Saturday, July 12, 2003 5:44 PM
> Subject: Is the language too bound for its own good? (was Re: 
> Klingon - 
> Terminology Databases (IMHO))
> 
> 
> > I 100% agree about making Klingon more "open."  It does feel like 
> our 
> > hands are tied behind our back and that we have no control over 
> the 
> > language.  To me, this is ridiculous.  We speak and write and 
> dedicate so 
> > much of our lives to this artificial language...why do we have no 
> > authority?  Okrand, to me, is a blessing!  He really is...I think 
> he is 
> > not only a genius (especially with making all the little 
> intricacies of 
> > tlhIngan Hol) but a wonderful human being as well.  The thing is, 
> having 
> > our knowledge only come from "Maltz," who readily speaks and gives 
> us 
> > information, is Hogwash!  We have far too many words that are not 
> present 
> > in Klingon...words that we sometimes desperately need...and too 
> much 
> > guessing involved.  In my humble opinion, the language cannot 
> expand and 
> > grow and prosper and exist in its fullest potential if it is not 
> allowed 
> > to.  One time I was sitting down with my Klingon House in our 
> monthly 
> > meeting and I had brought up tlhIngan Hol...I was disgusted that !
> >  no one
> >  knew anything about the language.  "How can a Klingon House no 
> nothing 
> > about tlhIngan Hol?" I asked them...and one of the members said to 
> me, 
> > "Because the language is too impractical.  You can't use it in 
> daily life, 
> > especially with having little to no words about daily items and 
> too much 
> > confusion about pronunciation and grammar.  We don't learn it 
> because it's 
> > not allowed to be anything more than a fake language."  That has 
> stuck 
> > with me for a very long time, and I have set out to prove them 
> wrong!  One 
> > day, I want my children understanding and speaking Klingon as 
> though it 
> > were Hebrew in a Jewish family.  One day, I want to have all the 
> > vocabulary and grammar rules down so cold that I can speak with 
> ease. 
> > This can't happen when it seems that the most common of sentences 
> have to 
> > be avoided or assumed because we don't have enough information 
> about it. 
> > The idea about us "humans" just not knowing enough about Klingon 
> culture 
> > and whatever else is getting quite old.  I regar!
> >  d myself
> >  as a Klingon anyway!  So why is it that us "Klingon's" still 
> don't know 
> > enough about the language.  If nothing else, the Federation and 
> the Empire 
> > have been allies for some time now...we should be unbound and 
> allowed to 
> > make this language as big as I know it can be.  This language, if 
> everyone 
> > knew how worth-wild and practical it really is, can be spoken 
> around the 
> > world with greater numbers than what it is now.  And of course, 
> the 
> > question now is...if Okrand isn't the only ruling body who makes 
> things 
> > "cannon" (though I think that has to stop also...this idea about 
> things 
> > being cannon or not is old, too.  If I were to call someone a 
> > "coffee-girl," I hate the fact that someone would say, "You can't 
> say 
> > qa'vInbe' because it's not in TKD."), then who is to say that 
> things are 
> > cannon?  A group?  An organization?  A vote?  From who?  Contest 
> winners? 
> > Dedicated enthusiasts?  People with a greater knowledge and 
> greater time 
> > spent on the language?  Whatever it is, I think somethi!
> >  ng has to
> >  happen soon...before we're all left without a prayer of expanding 
> the 
> > Honorable Language.
> >
> > [email protected] wrote:
> > >Does anyone else out there feel that Klingon should be made "Open 
> Source"
> > and >open
> > >to a regulatory body such as the KLI to develop further, or do 
> you all 
> > >think
> > that any
> > >developments should only come from Mark Okrand?
> >
> > I agree that tlhIngan Hol should be a growing language and at 
> times, the
> > language should change to monitor the changing of times. In any 
> language, 
> > the
> > vocabulary, meanings and even syntax changes with each new 
> generation. Why
> > should tlhIngan Hol be any different? Further, we should begin at 
> some 
> > point to
> > move away from Mark Okrand being the supreme authority on 
> everything 
> > tlhIngan
> > Hol. After all, there will be a day when Okrand go on to fight 
> battles 
> > along
> > side his honored ancestors. Where will we be then? As a child is 
> weaned 
> > off of
> > mothers' milk, so we should be weaned off of Okrand. The community 
> should
> > become the authority on the changes made to the language on 
> consensus; to
> > include new vocabulary, and even the syntax used when constructing 
> 
> > sentences and
> > words with prefixes and suffixes. That is the only way the 
> language will 
> > ever
> > survive. IMHO, like he said.
> > -veS joH
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Klingon Warrior
> > taHjaj wo'!
> > Darren M. Slade
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------
> > Do you Yahoo!?
> > SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month! 
> 


________________________________________________________________
The best thing to hit the internet in years - Juno SpeedBand!
Surf the web up to FIVE TIMES FASTER!
Only $14.95/ month - visit www.juno.com to sign up today!

Back to archive top level