[94301] in tlhIngan-Hol
Re: [Tlhingan-hol] Bad Klingon in Trek novels (and the like)
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Rohan Fenwick - QeS 'utlh)
Mon Aug 6 21:18:51 2012
From: Rohan Fenwick - QeS 'utlh <qeslagh@hotmail.com>
To: <tlhingan-hol@kli.org>
Date: Tue, 7 Aug 2012 11:17:12 +1000
In-Reply-To: <80E9B461-1A54-4BAC-B999-BB573099795D@flyingstart.ca>
Errors-To: tlhingan-hol-bounces@stodi.digitalkingdom.org
--===============3244477864696379465==
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="_363a492b-3516-463f-97d5-f4b7bf7953df_"
--_363a492b-3516-463f-97d5-f4b7bf7953df_
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
ghItlhpu' De'vID=2C jatlh:
> But OTOH actually publishing a Kindle version of the Psalms in
> pseudo-Klingon has done a lot of harm to the Klingonist community by
> perpetuating the idea that a word-by-word substitution counts as a
> "translation".
jang SuStel=2C jatlh:
> Those who know better won't be fooled=3B those who don't know better won'=
t
care. I don't see any point
> to it=2C but neither do I see any particular=20
harm.
ghItlhpu' Qov=2C jatlh:
> At 20=2C000'=2C trusting the autopilot=2C I'll tell you the harm.=20
> Imagine I've bought a TKD and it captures my imagination. I wonder if peo=
ple could really learn this.
> I've -heard- of people speaking Klingon. So I check out the bible thing. =
It's gibberish. Oh well=2C I guess
> no one really does this=2C and a potential Klingonist is lost.
wa' DoS wIqIpchu'. I have two more reasons for considering it harmful. Firs=
tly=2C it thumbs its nose at the immense labours behind the handful of true=
gems of Klingon literature. For instance=2C Nick Nicholas's titanic effort=
s in bringing us not one but two Shakespearean plays truly beggar belief. K=
lingon literature is sparse enough as it is that I think we have a responsi=
bility=2C as a community=2C to make our published works in Klingon be worth=
their while.
Secondly=2C the UTA purports to show what a "Klingon Bible" would look like=
. But anyone who's familiar with Klingon grammar can see that the pidgin th=
at the UTA spits out doesn't look at all like a grammatical Klingon text. I=
n some ways it's like saying that an English text gives you an idea of how =
Inuktitut looks. Yes=2C Inuktitut uses only roman letters=2C but they're pu=
t together in totally different ways and an Inuktitut text looks nothing li=
ke English in any way except the alphabet. So the UTA fails even in the pre=
mise it aims to fulfill.
QeS
=
--_363a492b-3516-463f-97d5-f4b7bf7953df_
Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<html>
<head>
<style><!--
.hmmessage P
{
margin:0px=3B
padding:0px
}
body.hmmessage
{
font-size: 10pt=3B
font-family:Tahoma
}
--></style></head>
<body class=3D'hmmessage'><div dir=3D'ltr'>
ghItlhpu' De'vID=2C jatlh:<br>>=3B But OTOH actually publishing a Kindle =
version of the Psalms in<br>>=3B pseudo-Klingon has done a lot of harm to=
the Klingonist community by<br>>=3B perpetuating the idea that a word-by=
-word substitution counts as a<br>>=3B "translation".<br><br>jang SuStel=
=2C jatlh:<br>>=3B Those who know better won't be fooled=3B those who don=
't know better won't
care. I don't see any point<br>>=3B to it=2C but neither do I see any pa=
rticular=20
harm.<br><br>ghItlhpu' Qov=2C jatlh:<br>>=3B At 20=2C000'=2C trusting the=
autopilot=2C I'll tell you the harm. <br><div>>=3B Imagine I've bought a=
TKD and it captures my imagination. I wonder if people could really learn =
this.<br>>=3B I've -heard- of people speaking Klingon. So I check out the=
bible thing. It's gibberish. Oh well=2C I guess<br>>=3B no one really do=
es this=2C and a potential Klingonist is lost.<br><br>wa' DoS wIqIpchu'. I =
have two more reasons for considering it harmful. Firstly=2C it thumbs its =
nose at the immense labours behind the handful of true gems of Klingon lite=
rature. For instance=2C Nick Nicholas's titanic efforts in bringing us not =
one but two Shakespearean plays truly beggar belief. Klingon literature is =
sparse enough as it is that I think we have a responsibility=2C as a commun=
ity=2C to make our published works in Klingon be worth their while.<br><br>=
Secondly=2C the UTA purports to show what a "Klingon Bible" would look like=
. But anyone who's familiar with Klingon grammar can see that the pidgin th=
at the UTA spits out doesn't look at all like a grammatical Klingon text. I=
n some ways it's like saying that an English text gives you an idea of how =
Inuktitut looks. Yes=2C Inuktitut uses only roman letters=2C but they're pu=
t together in totally different ways and an Inuktitut text looks nothing li=
ke English in any way except the alphabet. So the UTA fails even in the pre=
mise it aims to fulfill.<br><br>QeS<br></div> </div></body>
</html>=
--_363a492b-3516-463f-97d5-f4b7bf7953df_--
--===============3244477864696379465==
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
--===============3244477864696379465==--
