[101637] in tlhIngan-Hol
Re: [Tlhingan-hol] Things missing
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (qunnoQ HoD)
Thu Oct 29 10:18:13 2015
In-Reply-To: <56321EAE.4040701@trimboli.name>
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2015 16:17:59 +0200
From: qunnoQ HoD <mihkoun@gmail.com>
To: SuStel <sustel@trimboli.name>
Cc: tlhIngan Hol mailing list <tlhingan-hol@kli.org>
Errors-To: tlhingan-hol-bounces@kli.org
--===============2762602483880091816==
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a113f6dfe646ff405233efa08
--001a113f6dfe646ff405233efa08
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
it was very interesting to read all the various replies,with regard to my
original post ; still i believe it is important for me to address two
issues that came up. Two issues which i believe were brought forward as
questions to me.
1. why do you ask for more canon ?
2. who is to decide what should be considered valid/canon ?
although i could provide short answers to these questions i would rather
take the long way around.
lets start by writing some thoughts that may appear irrelevant at first,but
later on,it will be understood why i wrote them.
the skill someone has in Klingon can be measured by tests/grammar exercises
etc. how would you measure though how much he likes it ? how passionate he
is about it ? how much he wants to learn it ? is there a test ? a way to
find out ? i don't think so..
Klingon (and every other language constructed or not) falls under the
category "education". Surely not a kind of education you would profit from
- professionally - but it is a kind of education nevertheless ; What is one
of the most basic characteristics/attributes of education ? The fact that
it becomes a part of you. It becomes a part of yourself,and no one,no one
can ever separate you from it. Lets say you are an engineer. No matter what
happens you will always be an engineer. Even if war breaks out,even if you
find yourself stranded 1000 miles away from home,you will still be an
engineer. Your knowledge is a part of you,and it cannot be separated from
you. Ever. Furthermore education comes as an irreversible process which
changes you -irreversebly too-. You can't unlearn what you have already
learned.
Even if you changed profession,you would still be an engineer.
So to answer the first question..
"why do you ask for more canon ?"
It is not that i'm asking for more canon. It is that i want/i demand/accept
nothing less than Klingon to be perfect. Yes,now i'm a beginner. But the
time will come,when i will be able to write in Klingon ; when this language
will have been made a part of myself,the same way that my heart is a part
of my body. It will be part of my education/skills/abilities and i expect
nothing less than for it to be complete. To be as whole as possible. To be
far more superior than any other constructed language. I expect and demand
"borg perfection",the same way that Klingon will have expected from me
time/persistence/patience in order for it to become a part of me.
"why do you ask for more canon ? after all you can always find "ways
around" any deficiencies it may have"
..true, but ask yourselves. If you had a torn posterior cruciate ligament
in your knee,would you be ok with it ? You would be in pain from time to
time,but surely you could find a "way around" it too. You could take
meds,use a brace,do physical therapy etc,etc. Why would you prefer your
knee to be "perfect" ? wouldn't all those "ways around" suffice ?
You would want your knee to be "perfect" not only because you wouldn't want
to feel pain or activity restrictions. You would want your knee to be
perfect because it is a part of your body and you want/demand/accept
nothing else,than for it to be perfect.
so,because i love Klingon and because it is becoming/will eventually become
one of the languages i speak,because it is becoming a part of myself i
want/demand/accept nothing else than for it to be perfect. Its as simple as
that.
Second question..
who is to decide what should be considered valid ? who should create canon ?
i believe i'm the last person to answer those questions. as i noticed at
the archives,this mailing list goes way back so i think that experienced
Klingonists along with Okrand could decide that. Lets approach this from
another angle ; who's to decide whether a pharmaceutical product is safe ?
The FDA of course,right ? Who created the FDA ? The country whose people
were to be served by the FDA.
The subject of "fragmentation" came up ; "if an institution would create
canon,then wouldn't there be the possibility of schisms in the community,of
alternate versions of Klingon cropping up,every time a group of Klingonists
would disagree ?"
At first glance this is a valid argument. Even I,would be tempted to agree.
I mean lets face it. I always buy nexus phones because i want the "pure
android experience". And of course my phone isn't a part of me. How would i
be ok with any kind of "watered down" version of a language which is to
become a part of myself ? The answer is that of course i wouldn't be ok ;
that's why i wrote -even in my original post- that this institution would
have to be recognized as the "sole authority". The same way that the FDA is
the only organization with the authority to act in its area of expertise.
Surely someone could go on,and still use unsafe health products. But that
would be his choice,and eventually his problem.
I truly wonder.. If we were to say that to create an institution which
could create canon would lead to fragmentation, then would that mean that
the opposite would guarantee 100% canon conformity ? that the lack of such
an institution guarantees "purity" ?
If Klingon has inherent deficiencies in grammar/vocabulary,then one would
be forced to go through all kinds of "linguistic acrobatics" to get the
desired meaning through. Wouldn't that inevitably lead to ambiguity in
regard to the meaning he's trying to express ? Why shouldn't i think that
all these "acrobatics" wouldn't eventually lead to a sentence which's
meaning could be interpreted differently depending on the interpretation of
the individual listener ?
So,wouldn't we eventually have a language which's meaning would
fragment/dissolve depending on the individual ?
I can understand perfectly the argument that "what you describe can't ever
happen for copyright reasons". But i can't accept the argument "even if
there weren't copyright issues,then again canon shouldn't be created"
It is the law of nature that unless you adapt,unless you overcome
deficiencies then you'll be rendered obsolete. A law of nature,not mine ;
And this is something i do not like,something i do not want,something i do
not wish for a language that is slowly becoming a part of myself.
qunnoQ HoD
On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 3:27 PM, SuStel <sustel@trimboli.name> wrote:
> On 10/29/2015 2:16 AM, Tim Stoffel wrote:
>
>> Considering what the Klingon language community has accomplished over
>> the years, it would be a shame to think that the end of Marc Okrand
>> (which I hope is no time soon!) could be the end of the Klingon
>> language.
>>
>> We need a mechanism to keep the language alive.
>>
>
> Such a mechanism can be dreamed up at such time as Okrand leaves us or
> decides not to do Klingon anymore. Why try to impose it now? The language
> won't suddenly evaporate when he's gone.
>
> --
> SuStel
> http://trimboli.name
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tlhingan-hol mailing list
> Tlhingan-hol@kli.org
> http://mail.kli.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol
>
--001a113f6dfe646ff405233efa08
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"ltr"><br>it was very interesting to read all the various replie=
s,with regard to my original post ; still i believe it is important for me =
to address two issues that came up. Two issues which i believe were brought=
forward as questions to me.<br><br>1. why do you ask for more canon ?<br>2=
. who is to decide what should be considered valid/canon ?<br><br>although =
i could provide short answers to these questions i would rather take the lo=
ng way around.<br><br>lets start by writing some thoughts that may appear i=
rrelevant at first,but later on,it will be understood why i wrote them.<br>=
<br>the skill someone has in Klingon can be measured by tests/grammar exerc=
ises etc. how would you measure though how much he likes it ? how passionat=
e he is about it ? how much he wants to learn it ? is there a test ? a way =
to find out ? i don't think so..<br>Klingon (and every other language c=
onstructed or not) falls under the category "education". Surely n=
ot a kind of education you would profit from - professionally - but it is a=
kind of education nevertheless ; What is one of the most basic characteris=
tics/attributes of education ? The fact that it becomes a part of you. It b=
ecomes a part of yourself,and no one,no one can ever separate you from it. =
Lets say you are an engineer. No matter what happens you will always be an =
engineer. Even if war breaks out,even if you find yourself stranded 1000 mi=
les away from home,you will still be an engineer. Your knowledge is a part =
of you,and it cannot be separated from you. Ever. Furthermore education com=
es as an irreversible process which changes you -irreversebly too-. You can=
't unlearn what you have already learned.<br>Even if you changed profes=
sion,you would still be an engineer.<br><br>So to answer the first question=
.. <br><br>"why do you ask for more canon ?"<br><br>It is not tha=
t i'm asking for more canon. It is that i want/i demand/accept nothing =
less than Klingon to be perfect. Yes,now i'm a beginner. But the time w=
ill come,when i will be able to write in Klingon ; when this language will =
have been made a part of myself,the same way that my heart is a part of my =
body. It will be part of my education/skills/abilities and i expect nothing=
less than for it to be complete. To be as whole as possible. To be far mor=
e superior than any other constructed language. I expect and demand "b=
org perfection",the same way that Klingon will have expected from me t=
ime/persistence/patience in order for it to become a part of me.<br><br>&qu=
ot;why do you ask for more canon ? after all you can always find "ways=
around" any deficiencies it may have"<br><br>..true, but ask you=
rselves. If you had a torn posterior cruciate ligament in your knee,would y=
ou be ok with it ? You would be in pain from time to time,but surely you co=
uld find a "way around" it too. You could take meds,use a brace,d=
o physical therapy etc,etc. Why would you prefer your knee to be "perf=
ect" ? wouldn't all those "ways around" suffice ?<br>You=
would want your knee to be "perfect" not only because you wouldn=
't want to feel pain or activity restrictions. You would want your knee=
to be perfect because it is a part of your body and you want/demand/accept=
nothing else,than for it to be perfect.<br><br>so,because i love Klingon a=
nd because it is becoming/will eventually become one of the languages i spe=
ak,because it is becoming a part of myself i want/demand/accept nothing els=
e than for it to be perfect. Its as simple as that.<br><br>Second question.=
.<br><br>who is to decide what should be considered valid ? who should crea=
te canon ?<br><br>i believe i'm the last person to answer those questio=
ns. as i noticed at the archives,this mailing list goes way back so i think=
that experienced Klingonists along with Okrand could decide that. Lets app=
roach this from another angle ; who's to decide whether a pharmaceutica=
l product is safe ? The FDA of course,right ? Who created the FDA ? The cou=
ntry whose people were to be served by the FDA.<br><br>The subject of "=
;fragmentation" came up ; "if an institution would create canon,t=
hen wouldn't there be the possibility of schisms in the community,of al=
ternate versions of Klingon cropping up,every time a group of Klingonists w=
ould disagree ?"<br><br>At first glance this is a valid argument. Even=
I,would be tempted to agree. I mean lets face it. I always buy nexus phone=
s because i want the "pure android experience". And of course my =
phone isn't a part of me. How would i be ok with any kind of "wate=
red down" version of a language which is to become a part of myself ? =
The answer is that of course i wouldn't be ok ; that's why i wrote =
-even in my original post- that this institution would have to be recognize=
d as the "sole authority". The same way that the FDA is the only =
organization with the authority to act in its area of expertise.<br>Surely =
someone could go on,and still use unsafe health products. But that would be=
his choice,and eventually his problem.<br><br>I truly wonder.. If we were =
to say that to create an institution which could create canon would lead to=
fragmentation, then would that mean that the opposite would guarantee 100%=
canon conformity ? that the lack of such an institution guarantees "p=
urity" ?<br><br>If Klingon has inherent deficiencies in grammar/vocabu=
lary,then one would be forced to go through all kinds of "linguistic a=
crobatics" to get the desired meaning through. Wouldn't that inevi=
tably lead to ambiguity in regard to the meaning he's trying to express=
? Why shouldn't i think that all these "acrobatics" wouldn&#=
39;t eventually lead to a sentence which's meaning could be interpreted=
differently depending on the interpretation of the individual listener ?<b=
r>So,wouldn't we eventually have a language which's meaning would f=
ragment/dissolve depending on the individual ?<br><br>I can understand perf=
ectly the argument that "what you describe can't ever happen for c=
opyright reasons". But i can't accept the argument "even if t=
here weren't copyright issues,then again canon shouldn't be created=
"<br><br>It is the law of nature that unless you adapt,unless you over=
come deficiencies then you'll be rendered obsolete. A law of nature,not=
mine ; And this is something i do not like,something i do not want,somethi=
ng i do not wish for a language that is slowly becoming a part of myself.<b=
r><br>qunnoQ HoD<br><br><br><br></div><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br><div c=
lass=3D"gmail_quote">On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 3:27 PM, SuStel <span dir=3D"l=
tr"><<a href=3D"mailto:sustel@trimboli.name" target=3D"_blank">sustel@tr=
imboli.name</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" styl=
e=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><span c=
lass=3D"">On 10/29/2015 2:16 AM, Tim Stoffel wrote:<br>
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1p=
x #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
Considering what the Klingon language community has accomplished over<br>
the years, it would be a shame to think that the end of Marc Okrand<br>
(which I hope is no time soon!) could be the end of the Klingon<br>
language.<br>
<br>
We need a mechanism to keep the language alive.<br>
</blockquote>
<br></span>
Such a mechanism can be dreamed up at such time as Okrand leaves us or deci=
des not to do Klingon anymore. Why try to impose it now? The language won&#=
39;t suddenly evaporate when he's gone.<span class=3D"HOEnZb"><font col=
or=3D"#888888"><br>
<br>
-- <br>
SuStel<br>
<a href=3D"http://trimboli.name" rel=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">http:=
//trimboli.name</a></font></span><div class=3D"HOEnZb"><div class=3D"h5"><b=
r>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Tlhingan-hol mailing list<br>
<a href=3D"mailto:Tlhingan-hol@kli.org" target=3D"_blank">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>
--001a113f6dfe646ff405233efa08--
--===============2762602483880091816==
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
--===============2762602483880091816==--
