[101435] in tlhIngan-Hol
Re: [Tlhingan-hol] Klingon Word of the Day: veSDuj
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (qunnoQ HoD)
Tue Oct 20 11:33:02 2015
In-Reply-To: <ACF6622D959A8842A81E4471BA56A7E05C34B473@xm-mbx-04-prod.ad.uchicago.edu>
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2015 18:32:48 +0300
From: qunnoQ HoD <mihkoun@gmail.com>
To: Steven Boozer <sboozer@uchicago.edu>
Cc: "tlhingan-hol@kli.org" <tlhingan-hol@kli.org>
Errors-To: tlhingan-hol-bounces@kli.org
--===============7939337417662218732==
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a113f6dfe65953b05228af9ea
--001a113f6dfe65953b05228af9ea
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
> In a thesis written by Yens Wahlgren ("Klingon as Linguistic Capital"),
Marc Okrand commented pIqaD in this way:
> The mapping is very cleverly done... I think it is great, it makes it so
you can write the language... I wish I could read it, when I get something
written in pIqaD I'm able to very slowly > > figure it out... I am glad
someone really is doing it and has decided that it is an alphabet and not a
syllabary. Now we know, cause Michael Okuda and I didn't know that
the <<when I get something written in pIqaD I'm able to very slowly figure
it out>> is not actually a limitation inherent in the pIqaD itself. There
is a scientific proven explanation why this happens. The human mind is
trained -during reading- to actually disregard various letters. When you
read for instance the word <<flabbergasted>> your mind isn't actually
reading each and every letter ; It <<chooses>> to omit certain letters and
focus its attention on others. But in order for it to do so,a lot of
practice needs to take place. That's why at school we learn the
alphabet,then how to read syllables etc.. If someone *had to* read
pIqaD,then his mind would eventually adapt (Borg style) and remove any
obstacles at least as far speed is concerned.
at a previous mail i wrote :
> i remember many-many years ago hitting pause on some star trek
episode,and carefully looking at the various pIqaD characters thinking how
nice it would be to learn how to write them
still this not the end of the story ; the next thing i did was copy each of
those characters,assign to it a letter of my native alphabet,and memorize
them. the years that followed,i was so accustomed to writing in those
characters,that my writing speed was the same with the speed of my native
language ; but because after writing with these letters,i rarely
systematically read what i wrote, i never acquired any useful reading speed.
It is all a matter of practice ; Not an inherent flaw of pIqaD.
qunnoQ
On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 5:35 PM, Steven Boozer <sboozer@uchicago.edu> wrote:
> Lieven:
> > TKD (The Klingon dictionary) simply says that pIqaD "is not yet well
> > understood".
> > [....]
> > In a thesis written by Yens Wahlgren ("Klingon as Linguistic Capital"),
> > Marc Okrand commented pIqaD in this way:
> >
> > The mapping is very cleverly done... I think it is great, it makes it so
> > you can write the language... I wish I could read it, when I get
> something
> > written in {pIqaD} I'm able to very slowly figure it out... I am glad
> > someone really is doing it and has decided that it is an alphabet and not
> > a syllabary. Now we know, cause Michael Okuda and I didn't know that.
>
>
> I have a couple more comments by Okrand in my notes:
>
> st.klingon (10/1997): I'd love to know more about {pIqaD} as well... the
> Klingon romanization system is a phonemic system, but what about {pIqaD}?
> How, exactly, does {pIqaD} work? I'm not sure. Mike Okuda (who puts the
> characters on various control panels and other displays for the various
> Star Trek series and movies) and I have discussed it. We're pretty sure
> it's not an alphabet (and it's therefore not phonemic in the way the
> romanized version is), but we don't know the details. Prodding of Maltz is
> definitely in order here. There is no problem with {pIqaD} being used for
> the various dialects, regardless of how it works, because it does not
> necessarily work the same way (or, better, the details are not necessarily
> the same) for all of the dialects. Since the system has been around for a
> long time (if Kahless was literate, he was literate in {pIqaD}), it could
> provide some insights into earlier stages of the language. The rules for
> mapping the old pronunciations represented by the pIqaD writing conventions
> onto the new pronunciations surely differ for the different dialects, but
> the rules--with varying degrees of complexity, to be sure--certainly work.
> I agree with SuStel. Once we know the details of {pIqaD}, I'm sure we'll
> find it a more interesting system than the romanization system we're all
> used to.
>
> Seqram reported from a panel in Huntsville (9/1996): "In fact, Marc
> Okrand has said publicly that part of the holdup is that he and Okuda can't
> quite agree on what {pIqaD} should be like... He hasn't decided if it's a
> syllabary or logograms or pasigraphy or who-knows-what, but it's not an
> alphabet like we've been using. (My personal excuse for our method then
> becomes: well, this is a simplified alphabetical system for offworlders and
> certain restricted environments that occasionally crop up, like the way
> Japanese is occasionally written entirely in *kana* in telegrams, even
> though that's not the right way to write it [and is hard to read for
> natives].)"
>
> I'm sure others have talked to Okrand about this.
>
>
> --
> Voragh
> Ca'Non Master of the Klingons
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tlhingan-hol mailing list
> Tlhingan-hol@kli.org
> http://mail.kli.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol
>
--001a113f6dfe65953b05228af9ea
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"ltr"><div><div><div><div><div>> In a thesis written by Yens =
Wahlgren ("Klingon as Linguistic Capital"), Marc Okrand commented=
pIqaD in this way:<br>
> The mapping is very cleverly done... I think it is great, it makes it =
so
you can write the language... I wish I could read it, when I get=20
something written in pIqaD I'm able to very slowly > > figure it =
out... I am
glad someone really is doing it and has decided that it is an alphabet=20
and not a syllabary. Now we know, cause Michael Okuda and I didn't know=
=20
that<br><br></div>the <<when I get=20
something written in pIqaD I'm able to very slowly figure it out>>=
; is not actually a limitation inherent in the pIqaD itself. There is a sci=
entific proven explanation why this happens. The human mind is trained -dur=
ing reading- to actually disregard various letters. When you read for insta=
nce the word <<flabbergasted>> your mind isn't actually rea=
ding each and every letter ; It <<chooses>> to omit certain let=
ters and focus its attention on others. But in order for it to do so,a lot =
of practice needs to take place. That's why at school we learn the alph=
abet,then how to read syllables etc.. If someone *had to* read pIqaD,then h=
is mind would eventually adapt (Borg style) and remove any obstacles at lea=
st as far speed is concerned.<br><br></div>at a previous mail i wrote :<br>=
<br>> i remember many-many years ago hitting pause on some star trek=20
episode,and carefully looking at the various pIqaD characters thinking=20
how nice it would be to learn how to write them<br><br></div>still this not=
the end of the story ; the next thing i did was copy each of those charact=
ers,assign to it a letter of my native alphabet,and memorize them. the year=
s that followed,i was so accustomed to writing in those characters,that my =
writing speed was the same with the speed of my native language ; but becau=
se after writing with these letters,i rarely systematically read what i wro=
te, i never acquired any useful reading speed.<br><br></div>It is all a mat=
ter of practice ; Not an inherent flaw of pIqaD.<br><br></div>qunnoQ<br>
</div><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Mon, Oct=
19, 2015 at 5:35 PM, Steven Boozer <span dir=3D"ltr"><<a href=3D"mailto=
:sboozer@uchicago.edu" target=3D"_blank">sboozer@uchicago.edu</a>></span=
> wrote:<br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;bo=
rder-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Lieven:<br>
<span class=3D"">> TKD (The Klingon dictionary) simply says that pIqaD &=
quot;is not yet well<br>
> understood".<br>
</span>>=C2=A0 =C2=A0[....]<br>
<span class=3D"">> In a thesis written by Yens Wahlgren ("Klingon a=
s Linguistic Capital"),<br>
> Marc Okrand commented pIqaD in this way:<br>
><br>
> The mapping is very cleverly done... I think it is great, it makes it =
so<br>
> you can write the language... I wish I could read it, when I get somet=
hing<br>
> written in {pIqaD} I'm able to very slowly figure it out... I am g=
lad<br>
> someone really is doing it and has decided that it is an alphabet and =
not<br>
> a syllabary. Now we know, cause Michael Okuda and I didn't know th=
at.<br>
<br>
<br>
</span>I have a couple more comments by Okrand in my notes:<br>
<br>
st.klingon (10/1997):=C2=A0 I'd love to know more about {pIqaD} as well=
... the Klingon romanization system is a phonemic system, but what about {p=
IqaD}? How, exactly, does {pIqaD} work? I'm not sure. Mike Okuda (who p=
uts the characters on various control panels and other displays for the var=
ious Star Trek series and movies) and I have discussed it. We're pretty=
sure it's not an alphabet (and it's therefore not phonemic in the =
way the romanized version is), but we don't know the details. Prodding =
of Maltz is definitely in order here. There is no problem with {pIqaD} bein=
g used for the various dialects, regardless of how it works, because it doe=
s not necessarily work the same way (or, better, the details are not necess=
arily the same) for all of the dialects. Since the system has been around f=
or a long time (if Kahless was literate, he was literate in {pIqaD}), it co=
uld provide some insights into earlier stages of the language. The rules fo=
r mapping the old pronunciations represented by the pIqaD writing conventio=
ns onto the new pronunciations surely differ for the different dialects, bu=
t the rules--with varying degrees of complexity, to be sure--certainly work=
. I agree with SuStel. Once we know the details of {pIqaD}, I'm sure we=
'll find it a more interesting system than the romanization system we&#=
39;re all used to.<br>
<br>
Seqram reported from a panel in Huntsville (9/1996):=C2=A0 "In fact, M=
arc Okrand has said publicly that part of the holdup is that he and Okuda c=
an't quite agree on what {pIqaD} should be like... He hasn't decide=
d if it's a syllabary or logograms or pasigraphy or who-knows-what, but=
it's not an alphabet like we've been using. (My personal excuse fo=
r our method then becomes: well, this is a simplified alphabetical system f=
or offworlders and certain restricted environments that occasionally crop u=
p, like the way Japanese is occasionally written entirely in *kana* in tele=
grams, even though that's not the right way to write it [and is hard to=
read for natives].)"<br>
<br>
I'm sure others have talked to Okrand about this.<br>
<span class=3D"im HOEnZb"><br>
<br>
--<br>
Voragh<br>
Ca'Non Master of the Klingons<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
</span><div class=3D"HOEnZb"><div class=3D"h5">____________________________=
___________________<br>
Tlhingan-hol mailing list<br>
<a href=3D"mailto:Tlhingan-hol@kli.org">Tlhingan-hol@kli.org</a><br>
<a href=3D"http://mail.kli.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol" rel=3D"norefe=
rrer" target=3D"_blank">http://mail.kli.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol</=
a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br></div>
--001a113f6dfe65953b05228af9ea--
--===============7939337417662218732==
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
--===============7939337417662218732==--
