[2652] in tlhIngan-Hol
Universals and Aliens
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU)
Wed Jan 19 18:00:09 1994
Errors-To: <angghal@aol.com>
Errors-To: <angghal@aol.com>
Errors-To: <angghal@aol.com>
Errors-To: <angghal@aol.com>
Errors-To: <angghal@aol.com>
Reply-To: "Klingon Language List" <tlhIngan-Hol@klingon.East.Sun.COM>
From: angghal@aol.com
To: "Klingon Language List" <tlhIngan-Hol@klingon.East.Sun.COM>
Date: Wed, 19 Jan 94 17:50:02 EST
Errors-To: <angghal@aol.com>
Errors-To: <angghal@aol.com>
Errors-To: <angghal@aol.com>
Errors-To: <angghal@aol.com>
Reply-To: <angghal@aol.com>
Nick elaborated a bit on typological linguistics, which I think made clear
his annoyance that
> having been reading about language universals, I find there's
> very little else about Klingon that violates them.
I think there's a really interesting philosophical (and perhaps even
psychological) point here. It's one I've been grappling with since grad
school, and I'm not really any closer to it yet. I think it's at the heart
of Nick's point, or at least my take on it.
Here it is: A really "alien" language shouldn't look like language as we know
it.
Nick's approach on this deals with the linguistic universals, the general
patterns we find in terrestrial languages (e.g., what vowels a language will
have if it only has three, patterns of minimal pairs in the language's
phonology, and so forth). So, how "alien" can Klingon be, if it violates so
few of these universals?
Well, that's part of the point. It's the thing that makes linguists and
psycholinguists and psychologists who deal with language AND science fiction
groan. It's why the whole "universal translator" idea is crap. Here are the
two sides:
1) The aliens are like us, see the world the same way, have the same basic
intrinsic needs for shelter, food, achievement, make love and war as we do,
interact with their environments much as we do. You know, they're humanoid,
bipedal, tool users like us. So, their semantic primitives (if you'll assume
such things exist) are going to be like ours. If so, how different can their
languages be? Why shouldn't terrestrial universals turn out to be TRUE
universals, where these conditions of similarity are met? For the most part,
this seems to be what we get with Klingon. Slightly different, but close
enough that we can get a good grasp on the Klingon psyche, close enough for a
reasonable linguistic fit. Keep in mind the vast variance among terrestrial
cultures before you reject Klingons as being too different from us.
2) The aliens aren't like us. They don't have the same needs/desires/POV.
Why should they? They evolved in a vastly different eco system, with
different demands placed on their evolution. Why should we have any semantic
primitives in common with beings that are living energy, or perceive chemical
valences like we see billboards? Think about the word "alien" for a minute.
This is the question I've been grappling with. How will we talk to them?
Throw out the anthropomorphic "take us to your leader" crap and try to think
in an alien way. By definition, you shouldn't be able to (at least not
without leaving behind most definitions of mental health).
When I'm teaching psycholinguistics, I present these two views of alien
language to my students. It scares the shit out of them. I make the
question simpler, something they like, something they think is "cool" and
fun. I ask them to ponder the question if whales have language. Consider:
aquatic mammals with no natural predators (save us), no need to do much more
than swim around and open your mouth when your hungry for food to flow in.
Unlike mankind they didn't have to fight their environment, or develop tools
to tame it. Do they have language? Are they all philospher poets swimming
around sounding songs of platonic beauty across the ocean floors? Or are
they just big warm blooded fish that never evolved intelligence and language
because they didn't need to? A lot is going to depend on how you define
"langauge" (and that's the theme of my whole semester course, defining this
everyday thing we all use). If whales do have language, what do we have in
common with them, what world views do we share, that suggests we have
semantic primitives in common?
If we can't establish communication with what appears to be the other most
likely candidate for sentience on the planet (ok, substitute DOLPHIN for
WHALE if you like, I don't care), how are we going to talk to the guys from
Beta Proxima when they show up?
Ahem, I've gone far afield here, didn't mean to lecture, and I've surely
abused the intent of the mailing list with this post (let's be charitable
though and not call it a waste of bandwidth) so let me bring it back to the
original point. Klingon isn't "alien." If it really were, there's maybe a
couple people on this list with the expertise to even attempt (and fail) at
working with it. I'm assuming (big assumption?) that Marc, being a good
linguist and pretty intelligent guy, simply tried to make a language with a
very different feel to it. Enough strangeness that you say "wow, what a
weird language," even if you're Joe American, master of only your native
language. Strange, but not incomprehensible. Don't want to piss off the
director. Don't want to get so esoteric that you die before anyone puts in
the effort and time to catch the jokes you put into the language. All in
all, I think he succeeded.
Lawrence
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
:: Dr Lawrence M Schoen, Director ::
:: The Klingon Language Institute ::
:: POB 634, Flourtown, PA 19031 USA ::
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
