[110566] in tlhIngan-Hol
Re: [tlhIngan Hol] Is Star Trek: Discovery a new canon category?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (nIqolay Q)
Fri Aug 11 10:54:59 2017
X-Original-To: tlhingan-hol@lists.kli.org
In-Reply-To: <CAP7F2cKfmZtetyTE6WUo8z0E0YEeb6zCO8q2JVNhx=zbtVG7Og@mail.gmail.com>
From: nIqolay Q <niqolay0@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2017 10:54:54 -0400
To: "tlhingan-hol@kli.org" <tlhingan-hol@kli.org>
Reply-To: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
Errors-To: tlhingan-hol-bounces@lists.kli.org
--===============0454873117158207692==
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="94eb2c11c35c05008d05567b7f49"
--94eb2c11c35c05008d05567b7f49
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 10:04 AM, mayqel qunenoS <mihkoun@gmail.com> wrote:
> lieven:
> > Theoretically, if ALL that Qov has translated is just fine,
> > following the grammar, with no confusion - then why should
> > we not show it?
>
> In that case I want to ask, to include in boQwI' every other sentence
> every other grammarian has ever written.
>
boQwI' contains a number of entries which aren't Okrand canon (and they are
marked as not being by Okrand). There's the {taH pagh taHbe'} speech from
Hamlet, the "Blood was ankle deep" drinking song from DS9 (whose lyrics are
described as "not grammatical in modern standard Klingon, since they are
ancient"), a few words used in novels and the like (marked as "extended
canon: use with caution!"), and so on.
My guess is that the intent is to include non-canonical words or passages
that beginners may nonetheless have already heard of in some context other
than KLI-approved Klingon, so they can find information about them
(including their non-canonical status) when they come to look them up. In
this case, beginners coming to boQwI' from DSC might look up lines from the
show, and if those beginners find entries saying "this is a line from DSC,
it's probably okay but it's not by Okrand" that will probably be more
useful to them than finding no results at all and wondering why.
The majority of people who use boQwI' aren't die-hard Klingon fans like us.
(I was surprised when I first read that from De'vID. I hadn't really
anticipated the possibly that someone could be interested in Klingon
without going all-in.) It's quite likely that they aren't going to know
about the canon/non-canon distinction beforehand unless they are told.
Speaking for myself, I trust SuStel and lojmIt tI'wI' nuv more than Qov.
> So, why include her sentences and exclude theirs, or yours ? You're a
> grammarian, right ? Why should I study Qov's sentences, and not yours ?
>
Lots of people are going to be interested in Qov's sentences, because they
are going to be broadcast to potentially hundreds of thousands of people,
who have been told that it's all legitimate Klingon by the producers of
DSC.
Conversely, almost nobody outside the mailing list is going to be
interested in the things SuStel or lojmIt or you or me or even Qov have
said here unless they're reading the mailing list archives. No aspiring
Klingonist is going to come across (for example) my recent translation of
"The Second Coming" on the Internet somewhere and then hit up boQwI'
looking for more details. Including Qov's sentences in boQwI' would at
least provide an opportunity to get out in front of the issue, and help
beginners understand that these sentences aren't canonical.
(And, to reiterate... has anybody asked Okrand for his thoughts on the
matter?)
--94eb2c11c35c05008d05567b7f49
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"ltr"><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On F=
ri, Aug 11, 2017 at 10:04 AM, mayqel qunenoS <span dir=3D"ltr"><<a href=
=3D"mailto:mihkoun@gmail.com" target=3D"_blank">mihkoun@gmail.com</a>></=
span> wrote:<br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8e=
x;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir=3D"auto">lieven:<sp=
an class=3D""><div dir=3D"auto"><span style=3D"font-family:sans-serif;font-=
size:13.696px">> Theoretically, if ALL that Qov has translated is just f=
ine,=C2=A0</span></div><div dir=3D"auto"><span style=3D"font-family:sans-se=
rif;font-size:13.696px">> following the grammar, with no confusion - the=
n why should=C2=A0</span></div><div dir=3D"auto"><span style=3D"font-family=
:sans-serif;font-size:13.696px">> we not show it?</span><br></div><div d=
ir=3D"auto"><br></div></span><div dir=3D"auto">In that case I want to ask, =
to include in boQwI' every other sentence every other grammarian has ev=
er written.</div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>boQwI' contains=
a number of entries which aren't Okrand canon (and they are marked as =
not being by Okrand). There's the {taH pagh taHbe'} speech from Ham=
let, the "Blood was ankle deep" drinking song from DS9 (whose lyr=
ics are described as "not grammatical in modern standard Klingon, sinc=
e they are ancient"), a few words used in novels and the like (marked =
as "extended canon: use with caution!"), and so on. <br><br>My gu=
ess is that the intent is to include non-canonical words or passages that b=
eginners may nonetheless have already heard of in some context other than K=
LI-approved Klingon, so they can find information about them (including the=
ir non-canonical status) when they come to look them up. In this case, begi=
nners coming to boQwI' from DSC might look up lines from the show, and =
if those beginners find entries saying "this is a line from DSC, it=
9;s probably okay but it's not by Okrand" that will probably be mo=
re useful to them than finding no results at all and wondering why.<br><br>=
</div><div>The majority of people who use boQwI' aren't die-hard Kl=
ingon fans like us. (I was surprised when I first read that from De'vID=
. I hadn't really anticipated the possibly that someone could be intere=
sted in Klingon without going all-in.) It's quite likely that they aren=
't going to know about the canon/non-canon distinction beforehand unles=
s they are told.<br></div><div><br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" =
style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><di=
v dir=3D"auto"><div dir=3D"auto"></div><div dir=3D"auto">Speaking for mysel=
f, I trust SuStel and lojmIt tI'wI' nuv more than Qov. So, why incl=
ude her sentences and exclude theirs, or yours ? You're a grammarian, r=
ight ? Why should I study Qov's sentences, and not yours ?</div></div><=
/blockquote><div><br></div><div>Lots of people are going to be interested i=
n Qov's sentences, because they are going to be broadcast to potentiall=
y hundreds of thousands of people, who have been told that it's all leg=
itimate Klingon by the producers of DSC. <br><br>Conversely, almost nobody =
outside the mailing list is going to be interested in the things SuStel or =
lojmIt or you or me or even Qov have said here unless they're reading t=
he mailing list archives. No aspiring Klingonist is going to come across (f=
or example) my recent translation of "The Second Coming" on the I=
nternet somewhere and then hit up boQwI' looking for more details. Incl=
uding Qov's sentences in boQwI' would at least provide an opportuni=
ty to get out in front of the issue, and help beginners understand that the=
se sentences aren't canonical.<br><br></div><div>(And, to reiterate... =
has anybody asked Okrand for his thoughts on the matter?)<br></div><div><br=
></div></div></div></div>
--94eb2c11c35c05008d05567b7f49--
--===============0454873117158207692==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
_______________________________________________
tlhIngan-Hol mailing list
tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org
http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org
--===============0454873117158207692==--
