tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Sat Jan 13 11:15:26 2007

Back to archive top level

To this year's listing



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

Re: Why Do You Study Klingon?

...Paul ([email protected]) [KLI Member]



On Sat, 13 Jan 2007, Alan Anderson wrote:
>> What's the
>> difference between using Klingon to talk about the Nintendo Wii (no
>> offense, Doq, just the most recent example of a random conversation
>> done
>> in the language), and using a "code" to talk about the Nintendo Wii?
>
> ngoq mughlaH De'wI'.  qechmey tlhol DellaH Hol.  pImbej.

ngoq Dalo'laHpa' Hol Dalo'nIS...

What's the difference between me using English to describe an idea, then 
encoding it so nobody else can really understand it (except those in my 
little circle who know the code), and using Klingon to describe an idea? 
Being forced to recast concepts to fit is an interesting mental exercise, 
but ultimately, I'm not convinced using Klingon isn't really just a an 
exercise in linguistic encryption/decryption.

> jaS bIvanglaw':  <<wab le' vIlIngmeH tlhoy jIvumnIS. jIbuD, 'ej baS
> 'ay'vam vIweqDI', wab le' DaQoy 'e' Daghet vIneH. maQochbe'jaj.>>
> ghuy'cha'!  qech DaDelmeH nuH DIghajbogh Dalo'qangbe'chugh, qIgh
> Dalo' 'e' botbe' vay'.  'ach qIghlIj'e' wIpab maH 'e' yIqapQo' jay'!

I have to call bullshit here.  You have a great knack for ignoring things 
you don't want to admit.  You put forth your own theories on the language, 
but refuse to actually argue them logically.  It took forever for me to 
get you to give your theory that the prefixless and /-lu'/less purpose 
clauses were simply the use of a "raw verb", but you've never given any 
evidence to the fact that there's any canon evidence that verbs can be 
used "in the raw".  Your little theory answers your own question, and you 
feel no need to defend it (nor, it appears, do you feel any need to 
actually explain freely, electing instead to simply tell people their 
theories about how things work are merely wrong).

What you're missing is that you *are* expanding the language.  You just 
seem to think it's not worth attempting to reach a group concensus on any 
given topic.  Is it because you might then have to change your own views 
to reflect the group?  Or is it because you feel that expanding the 
definition of the language for your personal purposes is somehow less 
offensive than if the group came to an agreement and gave the decisions a 
little more weight?

>> And I don't even necessarily mean that we start letting people
>> 'make up words' and such.  One would hope that after long
>> discussions (around things like /-meH/, etc.) we could come to a
>> concensus, and somehow record these decisions for posterity, and,
>> until further notice, refer to them as 'authoritative'.
>
> Qo'.  mawuq maH 'e' chaw'bogh DIb wIHutlh.

noy vuDlIj.  Or should I say, your opinion an/noy/s.  :P

> Go ahead and use the language the way you think it should be used.
> If your usage is seen as uniquely effective and elegant, others will
> likely emulate it.  But I strongly believe that having the goal of
> publishing an authoritative decision on a point of usage is
> unreasonably presumptuous.

All I want to do is take some of these questions we have and try to see if 
we can't come to some agreement, and then document the agreement so we're 
not asking these questions OVER AND OVER AGAIN.  The goal is make sure we 
have decent concensus and then document it.

You seem to think my goal is to change the language myself.  That is 
entirely not the case.  My goal is that when we have oddities like the 
purpose clause issue, we discuss the possibilities, try to draw a 
conclusion that is generally acceptable, and then make sure we write down 
the conclusion somewhere for future reference.  We can caveat the hell out 
of it all you want about "This is not official Okrandian decision, but is 
a conclusion drawn from analysis and debate."  At least then, we can all 
be on the same page, and people coming into the fold (if there are any at 
this point) can find all the backstory on these nuances -- because there's 
no way people are getting back issues of HolQeD (when I bought a "complete 
set" several years ago, I was unable to get any of Volume 1 and I'm 
missing two issues of Volume 5, so I'm sure the back issues are even 
harder to find now...)

>> I differentiate this from contributing *content*, because really,
>> this becomes no different than "encoding".  The Shakespearean
>> translations are amazing works, and I don't want to detract from
>> the effort and achievement they represent.  But usually the purpose
>> of translating someone is such that persons who don't speak the
>> language a work was original conceived in, can similarly enjoy the
>> ideas presented.  As no one speaks Klingon natively who doesn't
>> also speak another language fluently...
>
> qatlh tlhIngan Hol lutmey lumughbe'qu'lu'pu'bogh DabuSHa'?

Unless you can't read English, I think I explained quite well why I 
discount the translations.

>> Maybe I've just hit a personal point where what I get out of
>> studying/using the language is limited; there's no more benefit I
>> can get from it, at least not until Okrand comes out with something
>> new that may give us more interesting linguistic concepts to chew
>
> Suja'chuqchugh neH SoH latlh je, bIyonbe''a'?  bIQuchmeH
> SachnIStaH'a' pab?  ghuy'cha'.

> If you're going to carry the same mindset of "I want to leave my mark
> on the language" that you show here, you're probably going to get the
> same sort of reaction from any language group.

It's obvious you have no understanding of anything I say, for whatever 
reason.  All I wanted to do with purpose clauses was to come to a 
concensus as to what is going on with some of the canon which isn't 
explained adequately by any of the grammatical rules we know.  Somehow 
that suddenly became equated with "changing" the language, and we all know 
how you feel about that.

When I say that my interest in Klingon is in learning the linguistic 
aspects and that, if the grammar doesn't change, then the language has 
reached the end of its usefulness for me, you pass judgment on me, an 
attitude that really just reinforces my low opinion of you.

Let me try to put this simply, so perhaps you can understand it:

1.  My interest in the language is primarily linguistic.  I enjoy(ed) 
learning it because I found interesting the differences between how the 
Klingon language worked from English.

2.  After 10+ years, I've pretty much seen all of the rules of grammar 
produced.  There are interesting things in the canon examples that don't 
appear to follow the known grammar.  But there is no desire to actually do 
anything with that information, because that would be "changing the 
language".

3.  So, the only interesting "things to do", that don't equate to mental 
masturbation, are to try to "discover" new aspects of the language (but if 
we can't actually come to a decision and use these aspects, what's the 
point?) or introduce new aspects to the language experimentally.

4.  Since you are completely opposed to any of this, and seem able to 
inflict your will on the group as a whole, there is no reason for me to 
continue.

I find it amusing that you apparently have volunteered to manage the KLI 
wiki, but apparently have put no real effort into it.  I asked a while 
back for you to put a link to the table of contents onto the start page, 
so the site would be more usable, but you seem to have ignored that.  It's 
not surprising, really; why would a person so vehemently opposed to 
contribution want to actually support and maintain a wiki, a platform 
designed to support social contribution?

I'm a ghost.  There's nothing more this language can give me if there's no 
room to evolve, and there's nothing more this list can give me if this is 
the kind of attitude people can expect.  If anyone wants to say anything 
more to me, just reply to me personally.  I'll have unsubscribed by the 
time you read this.

...Paul

          ** ...Paul, [email protected], Insane Engineer **
   ** Visit Project Galactic Guide http://www.galactic-guide.com/ **
               "I love it when a plan comes together."





Back to archive top level