[2666] in tlhIngan-Hol
Re: Universals and Aliens
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU)
Thu Jan 20 11:23:55 1994
Reply-To: "Klingon Language List" <tlhIngan-Hol@klingon.East.Sun.COM>
From: Will Martin <whm2m@uva.pcmail.virginia.edu>
To: "Klingon Language List" <tlhIngan-Hol@klingon.East.Sun.COM>
Date: Thu, 20 Jan 94 11:10:22 EST
On Jan 19, 5:53pm, angghal@aol.com wrote:
> Subject: Universals and Aliens
...
> Here it is: A really "alien" language shouldn't look like language as we
know
> it.
...
> 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).
...
> Lawrence
Great example. When the Brittish tried to say, "Take us to your leader,"
the Cherokee had a completely democratic society with all decisions made at
the township level by consensus. They did not merely lack a leader. They did
not have the concept of a leader. The Brittish handled this by arbitrarily
assigning the title of "chief" to one of the men in one of the towns.
We don't even have to leave the species to run into this sort of
conceptual presumptiveness. Meanwhile, I think that mainstream America is not
ready for serious reflection on alien thought patterns. They can barely even
handle the concept of aliens that LOOK different. They usually wind up being
people with different styles of lumps on their foreheads. Cardassians have
interesting necks. Complexions and eye color are occasionally interesting.
So the Klingon language is about as non-human as the average Star Trek
alien gets. The language suits the culture. We should not expect "deeper"
understanding of alien language than we get of alien biology or culture from
that show. Something that did a better job of "deeper" sci-fi probably would
not be as successful. I'm glad it is as good as it it. It certainly has
little competition. At least they've gotten farther before becoming
unacceptably shallow and repetitive as other sci-fi efforts. Max Headroom
comes to mind (a terrific show that died from premature creative exhaustion).
The whale/dolphin example is great. They clearly are telling each other
SOMETHING and we don't have a clue what it is. Facing humans, we can always
point to a tree and say "tree" and they will give us their word for it. We
can point to ourselves and say our names and they point to themselves and say
their names. Bingo. You have the beginning handhold on translating between
the languages. It may take time, but there are common gestures that work as
universals among humans.
So how do you get a whale to point to something? How do you know that
the whale hasn't been doing its equivalent thing to pointing, trying to get
through to us for centuries? How do you know whether or not it WANTS to
communicate?
-- charghwI'
