[90993] in tlhIngan-Hol
Re: [Tlhingan-hol] paq'batlh: TO SPEAK TO SOMEONE OF SOMETHING
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (lojmIt tI'wI'nuv)
Mon Nov 28 14:56:35 2011
From: lojmIt tI'wI'nuv <lojmitti7wi7nuv@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2011 14:56:14 -0500
In-Reply-To: <4ED3D9E7.8060806@trimboli.name>
To: tlhIngan Hol email discussion forum <tlhingan-hol@kli.org>
Errors-To: tlhingan-hol-bounces@stodi.digitalkingdom.org
--===============5249119085389344447==
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_28B4928C-F2E1-49C8-97EE-43C3AD2DDCAC"
--Apple-Mail=_28B4928C-F2E1-49C8-97EE-43C3AD2DDCAC
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset=us-ascii
So much of the things brought up in the discussion about these new canon =
collections makes me feel like Okrand suddenly had to come up with a LOT =
of canon translations for text other people gave him the English for and =
he got sloppy.=20
Very sloppy.
It's as if we took some arbitrary person from this list -- someone with =
less skill with the language than many of us -- and told him to make =
this stuff up.
It's very discouraging.
We get large volumes of new canon full of mistakes and hints at new =
grammatical constructions without any official analysis or descriptions =
of grammatical constructions not given to us in TKD or the appendix or =
anywhere else. So, when we get new vocabulary, how do we know it's not =
misspelled? When we get new grammar, how do we know it doesn't have =
editorial errors?
We're left with a mess.
I'm very disappointed in Okrand. We've been very loyal to him for a lot =
of years now, waiting for each little dribble of vocabulary, and then =
suddenly a couple of companies toss him some money and he sloppily =
throws new canon at them that is riddled with errors, and we get to try =
to figure out this new version of the language without a new TKD to help =
us understand it.
Perhaps it's just a new game better suited to different players. As one =
of the founding members of the KLI, I'm having to reevaluate whether I =
want to play anymore.
pItlh
lojmIt tI'wI'nuv
On Nov 28, 2011, at 1:58 PM, David Trimboli wrote:
> On 11/28/2011 1:51 PM, ghunchu'wI' 'utlh wrote:
>>=20
>> 2011/11/26 Agnieszka Solska<agnpau1@hotmail.com>:
>>>=20
>>> How do you make of the following line?
>>>=20
>>> Don't speak to me of honor
>>> quv HIja'chuqQo'
>>> (pp 156-157)
>>=20
>> In The Klingon Dictionary, {ja'chuq} is explicitly analyzed as "tell
>> each other". Marc Okrand once suggested that he would say more about
>> it on the MSN forum, but I don't think he got around to it before the
>> forum vanished.
>>=20
>> My first (and extremely strong) reaction is to say the sentence is =
not
>> grammatically correct. Had I seen it in the draft of the text, I =
would
>> have had the same reaction.
>=20
> It hurts my brain. {-chuq} means the object is "each other," but the =
prefix means the object is "me," and the actual object is "honor." Ugh.
>=20
> The only reason such an icky sentence appears is because {ja'chuq} is =
translated in the dictionary as "discuss." If that word weren't used, we =
wouldn't be having this trouble. It's all based on a poorly chosen =
English translation.
>=20
> Finding a better translation would require the context around the =
sentence, but I don't have the book.
>=20
> --=20
> SuStel
> http://www.trimboli.name/
>=20
> _______________________________________________
> Tlhingan-hol mailing list
> Tlhingan-hol@stodi.digitalkingdom.org
> http://stodi.digitalkingdom.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol
--Apple-Mail=_28B4928C-F2E1-49C8-97EE-43C3AD2DDCAC
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/html;
charset=us-ascii
<html><head></head><body style=3D"word-wrap: break-word; =
-webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; ">So =
much of the things brought up in the discussion about these new canon =
collections makes me feel like Okrand suddenly had to come up with a LOT =
of canon translations for text other people gave him the English for and =
he got sloppy. <div><br></div><div>Very =
sloppy.</div><div><br></div><div>It's as if we took some arbitrary =
person from this list -- someone with less skill with the language than =
many of us -- and told him to make this stuff =
up.</div><div><br></div><div>It's very =
discouraging.</div><div><br></div><div>We get large volumes of new canon =
full of mistakes and hints at new grammatical constructions without any =
official analysis or descriptions of grammatical constructions not given =
to us in TKD or the appendix or anywhere else. So, when we get new =
vocabulary, how do we know it's not misspelled? When we get new grammar, =
how do we know it doesn't have editorial =
errors?</div><div><br></div><div>We're left with a =
mess.</div><div><br></div><div>I'm very disappointed in Okrand. We've =
been very loyal to him for a lot of years now, waiting for each little =
dribble of vocabulary, and then suddenly a couple of companies toss him =
some money and he sloppily throws new canon at them that is riddled with =
errors, and we get to try to figure out this new version of the language =
without a new TKD to help us understand =
it.</div><div><br></div><div>Perhaps it's just a new game better suited =
to different players. As one of the founding members of the KLI, I'm =
having to reevaluate whether I want to play anymore.</div><div><br><div>
<span class=3D"Apple-style-span" style=3D"border-collapse: separate; =
color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Helvetica; font-style: normal; =
font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; =
line-height: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: -webkit-auto; text-indent: =
0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: =
0px; -webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 0px; =
-webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 0px; =
-webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: none; -webkit-text-size-adjust: =
auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; font-size: medium; =
"><div>pItlh</div><div>lojmIt tI'wI'nuv</div><div><br></div></span><br =
class=3D"Apple-interchange-newline">
</div>
<br><div><div>On Nov 28, 2011, at 1:58 PM, David Trimboli =
wrote:</div><br class=3D"Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote =
type=3D"cite"><div>On 11/28/2011 1:51 PM, ghunchu'wI' 'utlh =
wrote:<br><blockquote type=3D"cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote =
type=3D"cite">2011/11/26 Agnieszka Solska<<a =
href=3D"mailto:agnpau1@hotmail.com">agnpau1@hotmail.com</a>>:<br></bloc=
kquote><blockquote type=3D"cite"><blockquote =
type=3D"cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote =
type=3D"cite"><blockquote type=3D"cite">How do you make of the following =
line?<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote type=3D"cite"><blockquote =
type=3D"cite"><br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote =
type=3D"cite"><blockquote type=3D"cite"> Don't speak =
to me of honor<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote =
type=3D"cite"><blockquote type=3D"cite"> quv =
HIja'chuqQo'<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote =
type=3D"cite"><blockquote type=3D"cite"> (pp =
156-157)<br></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote =
type=3D"cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type=3D"cite">In The Klingon =
Dictionary, {ja'chuq} is explicitly analyzed as =
"tell<br></blockquote><blockquote type=3D"cite">each other". Marc Okrand =
once suggested that he would say more about<br></blockquote><blockquote =
type=3D"cite">it on the MSN forum, but I don't think he got around to it =
before the<br></blockquote><blockquote type=3D"cite">forum =
vanished.<br></blockquote><blockquote =
type=3D"cite"><br></blockquote><blockquote type=3D"cite">My first (and =
extremely strong) reaction is to say the sentence is =
not<br></blockquote><blockquote type=3D"cite">grammatically correct. Had =
I seen it in the draft of the text, I would<br></blockquote><blockquote =
type=3D"cite">have had the same reaction.<br></blockquote><br>It hurts =
my brain. {-chuq} means the object is "each other," but the prefix means =
the object is "me," and the actual object is "honor." Ugh.<br><br>The =
only reason such an icky sentence appears is because {ja'chuq} is =
translated in the dictionary as "discuss." If that word weren't used, we =
wouldn't be having this trouble. It's all based on a poorly chosen =
English translation.<br><br>Finding a better translation would require =
the context around the sentence, but I don't have the book.<br><br>-- =
<br>SuStel<br><a =
href=3D"http://www.trimboli.name/">http://www.trimboli.name/</a><br><br>__=
_____________________________________________<br>Tlhingan-hol mailing =
list<br>Tlhingan-hol@stodi.digitalkingdom.org<br>http://stodi.digitalkingd=
om.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol<br></div></blockquote></div><br></div=
></body></html>=
--Apple-Mail=_28B4928C-F2E1-49C8-97EE-43C3AD2DDCAC--
--===============5249119085389344447==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
_______________________________________________
Tlhingan-hol mailing list
Tlhingan-hol@stodi.digitalkingdom.org
http://stodi.digitalkingdom.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol
--===============5249119085389344447==--
