[100450] in tlhIngan-Hol
[Tlhingan-hol] > Subject: Re: paq'batlh text for Bing
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Christoph Pichlmann)
Thu Mar 19 14:39:48 2015
From: Christoph Pichlmann <christoph_pichlmann@hotmail.com>
To: "tlhIngan-Hol@kli.org" <tlhingan-hol@kli.org>
Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2015 19:39:28 +0100
In-Reply-To: <mailman.2564.1426785289.13074.tlhingan-hol@kli.org>
Errors-To: tlhingan-hol-bounces@kli.org
--===============4800597469764379124==
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="_ad6b2d3f-9d79-4617-bb26-a44d047eb5de_"
--_ad6b2d3f-9d79-4617-bb26-a44d047eb5de_
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
You DO realize that even people who are actively learning klingon might nee=
d a help=2C to look up a word=2C or confirm that what they cobbled together=
actually can be understood?
If someone wants to hack badly done klingon=2C there are ample resources fo=
r that right now. There have always been. A translator like bing makes it a=
fair bit easier=2C sure=2C but it's also easier to generate interest.
Not everyone thinks its fun to memorize (not learn) vocabulary or create a =
database of words just to have something to look it up. (It certainly isn't=
a learning experience - I don't have to actually read what I write when I'=
m just copying.)
When I'm trying to create a sentence=2C I constantly look up words at Kling=
onska=2C check them with pojwI' and would love to have something that could=
give a pointer for the klingon word I'm searching for.
Most of the time spent is trying to find synonyms that express the idea I h=
ave in mind but lack the precise word that exists in klingon.
I don't think anyone who actually thinks about it would ever use a machine =
translation and think they're done. Even with simple things like german<>en=
glish I wouldn't trust them enough.
Christoph
> Message: 7
> Date: Thu=2C 19 Mar 2015 13:14:36 -0400
> From: lojmitti7wi7nuv@gmail.com
> To: "tlhingan-hol@stodi.digitalkingdom.org"
> <tlhingan-hol@stodi.digitalkingdom.org>
> Subject: Re: [Tlhingan-hol] paq'batlh text for Bing
> Message-ID: <C9890709-74E6-4547-BAE7-03F50F1604F2@gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain=3B charset=3Dwindows-1252
>=20
> Being able to speak a language with a limited population of speakers is f=
un=2C and I suspect it is good for my mind=2C expanding the depth of meanin=
g that anything I translate contains because of this sometimes jarring diff=
erence between the scope and focus of the two radically different languages=
. The thought gets polished in the parsing.
>=20
> But starting with the population of people who think they can just use Bi=
ng and not have to learn the language=2C do you really expect anyone to put=
in the actual hours of effort it takes to learn the language? I suspect th=
at all we?ll accomplish is lose the capacity to write a secret to someone i=
n a language few outsiders could understand. Now=2C EVERYONE will be able t=
o hack really badly done Klingon for mild amusement.
>=20
> And that?s pretty much where their effort will stop.
>=20
> I don?t care about people who write gibberish in pseudo-Klingon. Why do y=
ou? Do you think our cultural situation is improved because casual passers-=
by can write slightly more meaningful gibberish with the aid of computers?
>=20
> I would LOVE to have more people to speak Klingon with=2C but I want THEM=
to be doing the reading and writing and speaking and hearing. I don?t want=
them going to Bing or some other translator and have it handle the work=2C=
because if I wanted that=2C why bother dealing with them at all? I could j=
ust use Bing or some other translator myself.
>=20
> My favorite episode of the use of Klingon in my life was a very emotional=
conversation among Seqram=2C Qov and myself=2C full of tears and reassuran=
ce=2C stress and comfort between three people who didn?t have to drop back =
to some other language to have the conversation just because it was a real =
conversation instead of just practicing. It was beautiful.
>=20
> And Bing will never be the root cause of anything close to that. Nor will=
any other programmed crutch.
>=20
> I?m already overly reliant upon a lexicon because of lack of practice. As=
are most of us. We don?t need a sturdier crutch.
>=20
> We need spiritual spark.
>=20
> lojmIt tI?wI? nuv ?utlh
> Retired Door Repair Guy
>=20
> > On Mar 19=2C 2015=2C at 12:48 PM=2C Lieven <levinius@gmx.de> wrote:
> >=20
> > Am 19.03.2015 um 17:14 schrieb Robyn Stewart:
> >> Reason #1: Improving the worst Klingon on the net=2C as well as the be=
st.
> >=20
> > Not only the net=2C there are many other sources=2C even licensed Star =
Trek books(!) using Bing=2C like the klingon star chart in the book "Stella=
r Cartography".
> > (see http://www.klingonwiki.net/En/StellarCartography for details)
> >=20
> >> It?s still going to need work by an expert to be good Klingon=2C but i=
t
> >> will be closer to Klingon than to gibberish.
> >=20
> > As Qov says=2C Bing will NEVER reach the skill of an experienced Klingo=
n Speaker.
> >=20
> >> Reason #6: Transference
> >> too=2C on the grounds that if more people learn to speak Klingon it wi=
ll
> >> dilute the status of your rare skill?
> >=20
> > It's like asking a professor why he is teaching his students=2C risking=
they may get better and more skilled than him=2C and the professor may los=
e his job?
> >=20
> > --=20
> > Lieven L. Litaer
> > aka Quvar valer 'utlh
> > http://www.facebook.com/Klingonteacher
> > http://www.klingonwiki.net/En/StellarCartography
> > http://www.klingonwiki.net/De/Freiberg
> >=20
> > _______________________________________________
> > Tlhingan-hol mailing list
> > Tlhingan-hol@kli.org
> > http://mail.kli.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol
=
--_ad6b2d3f-9d79-4617-bb26-a44d047eb5de_
Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<html>
<head>
<style><!--
.hmmessage P
{
margin:0px=3B
padding:0px
}
body.hmmessage
{
font-size: 12pt=3B
font-family:Calibri
}
--></style></head>
<body class=3D'hmmessage'><div dir=3D'ltr'>You DO realize that even people =
who are actively learning klingon might need a help=2C to look up a word=2C=
or confirm that what they cobbled together actually can be understood?<br>=
If someone wants to hack badly done klingon=2C there are ample resources fo=
r that right now. There have always been. A translator like bing makes it a=
fair bit easier=2C sure=2C but it's also easier to generate interest.<br>N=
ot everyone thinks its fun to memorize (not learn) vocabulary or create a d=
atabase of words just to have something to look it up. (It certainly isn't =
a learning experience - I don't have to actually read what I write when I'm=
just copying.)<br><br>When I'm trying to create a sentence=2C I constantly=
look up words at Klingonska=2C check them with pojwI' and would love to ha=
ve something that could give a pointer for the klingon word I'm searching f=
or.<br>Most of the time spent is trying to find synonyms that express the i=
dea I have in mind but lack the precise word that exists in klingon.<br><br=
>I don't think anyone who actually thinks about it would ever use a machine=
translation and think they're done. Even with simple things like german<=
=3B>=3Benglish I wouldn't trust them enough.<br><br>Christoph<br><br><br>=
<div>>=3B Message: 7<br>>=3B Date: Thu=2C 19 Mar 2015 13:14:36 -0400<br=
>>=3B From: lojmitti7wi7nuv@gmail.com<br>>=3B To: "tlhingan-hol@stodi.d=
igitalkingdom.org"<br>>=3B <=3Btlhingan-hol@stodi.digitalkingdom.org&g=
t=3B<br>>=3B Subject: Re: [Tlhingan-hol] paq'batlh text for Bing<br>>=
=3B Message-ID: <=3BC9890709-74E6-4547-BAE7-03F50F1604F2@gmail.com>=3B<=
br>>=3B Content-Type: text/plain=3B charset=3Dwindows-1252<br>>=3B <br>=
>=3B Being able to speak a language with a limited population of speakers=
is fun=2C and I suspect it is good for my mind=2C expanding the depth of m=
eaning that anything I translate contains because of this sometimes jarring=
difference between the scope and focus of the two radically different lang=
uages. The thought gets polished in the parsing.<br>>=3B <br>>=3B But s=
tarting with the population of people who think they can just use Bing and =
not have to learn the language=2C do you really expect anyone to put in the=
actual hours of effort it takes to learn the language? I suspect that all =
we?ll accomplish is lose the capacity to write a secret to someone in a lan=
guage few outsiders could understand. Now=2C EVERYONE will be able to hack =
really badly done Klingon for mild amusement.<br>>=3B <br>>=3B And that=
?s pretty much where their effort will stop.<br>>=3B <br>>=3B I don?t c=
are about people who write gibberish in pseudo-Klingon. Why do you? Do you =
think our cultural situation is improved because casual passers-by can writ=
e slightly more meaningful gibberish with the aid of computers?<br>>=3B <=
br>>=3B I would LOVE to have more people to speak Klingon with=2C but I w=
ant THEM to be doing the reading and writing and speaking and hearing. I do=
n?t want them going to Bing or some other translator and have it handle the=
work=2C because if I wanted that=2C why bother dealing with them at all? I=
could just use Bing or some other translator myself.<br>>=3B <br>>=3B =
My favorite episode of the use of Klingon in my life was a very emotional c=
onversation among Seqram=2C Qov and myself=2C full of tears and reassurance=
=2C stress and comfort between three people who didn?t have to drop back to=
some other language to have the conversation just because it was a real co=
nversation instead of just practicing. It was beautiful.<br>>=3B <br>>=
=3B And Bing will never be the root cause of anything close to that. Nor wi=
ll any other programmed crutch.<br>>=3B <br>>=3B I?m already overly rel=
iant upon a lexicon because of lack of practice. As are most of us. We don?=
t need a sturdier crutch.<br>>=3B <br>>=3B We need spiritual spark.<br>=
>=3B <br>>=3B lojmIt tI?wI? nuv ?utlh<br>>=3B Retired Door Repair Guy=
<br>>=3B <br>>=3B >=3B On Mar 19=2C 2015=2C at 12:48 PM=2C Lieven <=
=3Blevinius@gmx.de>=3B wrote:<br>>=3B >=3B <br>>=3B >=3B Am 19.03=
.2015 um 17:14 schrieb Robyn Stewart:<br>>=3B >=3B>=3B Reason #1: Imp=
roving the worst Klingon on the net=2C as well as the best.<br>>=3B >=
=3B <br>>=3B >=3B Not only the net=2C there are many other sources=2C e=
ven licensed Star Trek books(!) using Bing=2C like the klingon star chart i=
n the book "Stellar Cartography".<br>>=3B >=3B (see http://www.klingonw=
iki.net/En/StellarCartography for details)<br>>=3B >=3B <br>>=3B >=
=3B>=3B It?s still going to need work by an expert to be good Klingon=2C =
but it<br>>=3B >=3B>=3B will be closer to Klingon than to gibberish.<=
br>>=3B >=3B <br>>=3B >=3B As Qov says=2C Bing will NEVER reach the=
skill of an experienced Klingon Speaker.<br>>=3B >=3B <br>>=3B >=
=3B>=3B Reason #6: Transference<br>>=3B >=3B>=3B too=2C on the grou=
nds that if more people learn to speak Klingon it will<br>>=3B >=3B>=
=3B dilute the status of your rare skill?<br>>=3B >=3B <br>>=3B >=
=3B It's like asking a professor why he is teaching his students=2C risking=
they may get better and more skilled than him=2C and the professor may los=
e his job?<br>>=3B >=3B <br>>=3B >=3B -- <br>>=3B >=3B Lieven L=
. Litaer<br>>=3B >=3B aka Quvar valer 'utlh<br>>=3B >=3B http://www=
.facebook.com/Klingonteacher<br>>=3B >=3B http://www.klingonwiki.net/En=
/StellarCartography<br>>=3B >=3B http://www.klingonwiki.net/De/Freiberg=
<br>>=3B >=3B <br>>=3B >=3B _______________________________________=
________<br>>=3B >=3B Tlhingan-hol mailing list<br>>=3B >=3B Tlhing=
an-hol@kli.org<br>>=3B >=3B http://mail.kli.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhing=
an-hol<br></div> </div></body>
</html>=
--_ad6b2d3f-9d79-4617-bb26-a44d047eb5de_--
--===============4800597469764379124==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
_______________________________________________
Tlhingan-hol mailing list
Tlhingan-hol@kli.org
http://mail.kli.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol
--===============4800597469764379124==--
