[566] in tlhIngan-Hol
Re: Spelling: 'i' versus 'I'
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU)
Wed Apr 14 19:39:21 1993
Errors-To: tlhIngan-Hol-request@village.boston.ma.us
Errors-To: tlhIngan-Hol-request@village.boston.ma.us
Errors-To: tlhIngan-Hol-request@village.boston.ma.us
Errors-To: tlhIngan-Hol-request@village.boston.ma.us
Errors-To: tlhIngan-Hol-request@village.boston.ma.us
Errors-To: tlhIngan-Hol-request@village.boston.ma.us
Errors-To: tlhIngan-Hol-request@village.boston.ma.us
Errors-To: tlhIngan-Hol-request@village.boston.ma.us
Reply-To: "Klingon Language List" <tlhIngan-Hol@village.boston.ma.us>
From: Ken_Beesley.PARC@xerox.com
To: "Klingon Language List" <tlhIngan-Hol@village.boston.ma.us>
Cc: tlhIngan-Hol@village.boston.ma.us
Date: Wed, 14 Apr 1993 14:53:14 PDT
In-Reply-To: "mark@dragonsys:com:Xerox's message of Wed, 14 Apr 1993 14:04:23 P
>>>Note: not ALL Esperantists waste time arguing over accented
letters! Some of us have pleasanter ways to waste time...
ekzemple, lernante la tlingonan (e.g., learning Klingon).
- marqem<<<
On the issue of expanding the Klingon vocabulary, we might take a lesson from
the Esperantists. The standard reference dictionary for Esperanto is, or used
to be, the Plena Vortaro (PV) or Plena Ilustrita Vortaro (PIV). When an author
found himself or herself in a jam, and just had to invent or use a root that
was not sanctioned by PIV, then (s)he would list them, with translations, at
the front of the work, under a title like "Vortoj kiuj ne trovig^as en Plena
Vortaro. " ("Words that are not found in Plena Vortaro." Or should I write
"trovigxas"? Or "trovighas"? I mean the 'g' with the circumflex over it.) It
is thus the responsibility of the author to state "Here are the ways that I
have diverged from the printed standard." Also a courtesy. This of course
does not make the new usages standard, and the author is still subject to
catcalls and artillery fire from the Akademio and fellow Esperantists.
For example, we have voQ as the verb "to choke." Unless I missed something, we
do not currently know if there is also a zero derivation to a noun voQ. And we
don't know what exactly it might mean if it did exist. Under the Esperanto/PIV
plan, a writer who just had to use it as a noun would add the following at the
beginning of their opus:
Words that are not found in TKD
voQ choking (n) ; i.e. the act of choking somebody
or they might choose a different meaning
voQ choking (n) ; i.e. what one does when one cannot breathe
or
voQ choker (n) ; someone who chokes others
or
voQ choke-chain (v) ; for training dogs or whatever Klingons
train
etc.
Perhaps such unsanctioned roots should appear with some kind of markers, like
<root> in the text. E.g. <voQ>'a'meywIjmo' "because of my strong
choke-chains." The angle brackets would tell the reader that the usage cannot
be sanctioned by TKD and must be looked up in the writer's private lexicon of
suggested expansions. They are like scare quotes saying "This ain't standard
Klingon."
Completely new roots could be suggested, listed overtly, and marked in a text
in the same way. The suggested expansion lists from various writers could
easily be collected periodically and submitted to Okrand or whoever has the
power to sanctify them.
My Esperanto may well be faulty. I invite corrections, so no flames are
necessary.
Ken Beesley
