[85841] in tlhIngan-Hol
Re: Klingon orthography (was: Okrand at qep'a')
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (ghunchu'wI')
Tue Jun 23 23:36:05 2009
In-Reply-To: <70AC58AF-8073-4AEF-BA65-3B31CD95A5E6@evertype.com>
From: "ghunchu'wI'" <qunchuy@alcaco.net>
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2009 23:34:59 -0400
To: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
Errors-to: tlhingan-hol-bounce@kli.org
Reply-to: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
On Jun 23, 2009, at 7:20 PM, Michael Everson wrote:
>> If you want it to be more "readable", I think you're trying to solve
>> something which is not a problem, and I think your proposed
>> solutions are counterproductive.
>
> "Counterproductive" to what?
Counterproductive to readability. Using unfamiliar characters seems
a lot more off-putting to most people than using familiar characters
in novel arrangements.
> I will ask you again, however, to look at the different oiptions
> posted, and indicate which look "better" and which look "worse".
They all look "different". The ones with lots of diacritic-style
marks on the letters look unpalatable to me. The ones that use the
letters I see on my keyboard look much more approachable.
You didn't give any examples of *completely* different alphabets,
such as Hebrew or Tengwar or the pseudo-pIqaD sometimes used for
Klingon. I'm not sure if that would change my opinion of the ones
you did give.
>> I also strongly disagree with your statement that mutable case can
>> "make any text easier to read", though I don't consider it important
>> enough to debate.
>
> That's why all Latin orthographies make use of case. If it were not
> useful, it would be abandoned. I see that you use it when you write
> English.
I'm a great fan of lowercase. I'm not a great fan of using uppercase
willy-nilly. I follow the standard usage, both in English and in
{tlhIngan Hol}, though I'd have no problem if capital letters were to
vanish from English.
-- ghunchu'wI'
