[93769] in tlhIngan-Hol
Re: [Tlhingan-hol] Time and Type 7 verb suffixes
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (David Trimboli)
Sun Jun 17 15:31:30 2012
Date: Sun, 17 Jun 2012 15:31:08 -0400
From: David Trimboli <david@trimboli.name>
To: tlhingan-hol@stodi.digitalkingdom.org
In-Reply-To: <98A006C4-5063-43A1-93FE-7130AE89119C@alcaco.net>
Errors-To: tlhingan-hol-bounces@stodi.digitalkingdom.org
On 6/17/2012 2:47 PM, ghunchu'wI' wrote:
>
> On Jun 17, 2012, at 11:18 AM, David Trimboli <david@trimboli.name>
> wrote:
>
>> And there you have it, folks. When you disagree with ghunchu'wI',
>> you deserve mockery.
>
> Disagreeing with me is not the problem. You deserve it when you
> refuse to consider a large body of Klingon text bearing Marc Okrand's
> name, complaining that it will naturally support the opinion of the
> people invoking it as relevant.
That is not a cause for mockery. Civil disagreement, sure. Not mockery,
not disrespect.
Qov, for instance, has been very careful to avoid responding to this
particular part of the thread, presumably because it's ugly and irrelevant.
And to reiterate: I do not "refuse to consider" it. I have suspicions. I
cannot declare my faith that this is pristine Klingon; neither can I
declare my faith that this is adulterated nonsense. And in any case
where examples of a point of grammar *only* appear in paq'batlh, my
suspicions are even stronger, but still not absolute rejection.
> It's not clear to me why you're so reluctant to treat the content of
> the paq'batlh narrative as examples of correct grammar.
I have expressed my reasons for this directly at you several times. I'm
not going to do so again.
> Is it because some of us had the opportunity before it was published
> to change it to match your interpretation of Klingon aspect suffixes
> but did not do so?
You keep accusing me of being upset that I wasn't there, or of not being
able to put my mark on the thing. You seem quite fixated on this idea.
Banish it from your mind. When I heard about the editing session, I
complained about editing by committee. You read that yourself. If I had
been there I wouldn't have been any happier about it. Not because I
think editing by committee can't work, but because I knew that anything
the committee churned out was going to be hailed as authentic Klingon.
Authentic Klingon by a committee of non-Klingons. I'd be happier with
the original, error-ridden text with a note that it is known to have
errors. Or an acceptance of the work as by Klingons but edited by
Terrans studying Klingon and hence a step away from "definitely how
Klingons speak or write." If I had been there I *still* would have
preferred this.
I would probably enjoy philology. This is a perfect example of a
philological issue.
--
SuStel
http://www.trimboli.name/
_______________________________________________
Tlhingan-hol mailing list
Tlhingan-hol@stodi.digitalkingdom.org
http://stodi.digitalkingdom.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol
