[tlhIngan Hol] I h-a-t-e transliteration

[mayqel qunen'oS]

jiH:
> Transliteration shows the inability of him who transliterates, to
> accept the simple fact, that vocabulary-wise, klingon will never be
> complete.
Daniel:
> So by “transliteration” are you talking more narrowly about the particular act
> of using transliteration to import vocabulary from another language, instead of
> just dropping a non-Klingon word in, untransliterated?

I'm not sure I understand what you're trying to say here. What is your
point ? Elaborate further, so I'll be able to reply.

Daniel:
> It’s not quite the same. You can make up words using other words

I disagree. It's *exactly* the same.

We *can* use already existing klingon words, to convey the desired
meaning. We *can* say for example {molmey Daq} for "graveyard". Sure,
someone else may choose another way to describe this place. But we
certainly *cannot* say {greyvIyarID} or anything similar.

Daniel:
> it seems that what bothers you about this particular use of transliteration
> is that it demonstrates an unwillingness to acknowledge that Klingon possesses
> an “incomplete” vocabulary, whatever that means.

It means that klingon possesses an incomplete vocabulary..

I was always amazed, by the amount of discomfort this sentence causes
to people. Truly.. If people believe that klingon vocabulary-wise is
complete, then why do they keep asking okrand for new words ?

Why has kli created a voting system for new vocabulary ? If people
believe that klingon vocabulary is complete, then why do they waste
okrand's time requesting from him new words ?

If klingon vocabulary was complete a year ago, then why did okrand
need to create new words for dsc ? Why did okrand create new words for
"the little prince" ?

People keep saying that they can't understand how klingon vocabulary
is incomplete, all while okrand *does* create new vocabulary..

Why doesn't okrand say, "don't ask me for new words, the vocabulary I
gave you is complete" ?

So, who can seriously claim that the vocabulary we have is complete ?

Thank qeylIS, okrand doesn't share your view.. Because if he did, and
went on saying "don't ask for new words, everything is perfect", then
soon he would be the only one using the language.

Daniel:
> I get bothered by assertions that the Klingon vocabulary isn’t “complete”.
> What does that mean? That there exists a word to express every possible
> meaning that one could desire? I don’t think any language is complete, by
> that impossible metric
> I did a search for “words with no English equivalent

Your reasoning is flawed. Seriously flawed. You're creating a
straw-man argument..

You cite a list, implying that the reason I say klingon is incomplete,
is because it is lacking this kind of words..

>From everything that I wrote, is this what you have understood ?

Does klingon have a word for the breasts of woman ? Does klingon have
a word for "joint" as in "knee joint" ? Does klingon have a word for
"ash" ? Are there any natural languages which lack those words ?

So yeah, klingon *is* deficient, because it lacks essential words
which ALL natural languages have. Not because it lacks the kinds of
words that are cited in the list you mentioned.

But again, if your opinion is that klingon is complete, I respect it..
But if you *do* believe that, then I expect that you, and any other
members of the klingon community who share your opinion do one simple
thing:

1. request directly from okrand that he does not dispense new words

Simple isn't it ? Why don't you do it ? And why do ALL klingonists
rejoice the moment they receive new words ?

Daniel:
> I personally think that proper nouns are fair game, especially if context makes
> it clear that a transliterated proper noun isn’t intended to be a Klingon word, and
> that a reader familiar with the context for that proper noun would be able to deduce
> which proper noun was intended.

Fair game is only Ca'NoN. Period. Nothing more, nothing less.

Daniel:
> Actually, разблюто is a bad example, since it’s not a real Russian word
> So surely it’s safer to leave things like proper nouns untransliterated, but that
> only really works well if you’re writing Klingon using the Latin alphabet and using
> proper nouns that are written in that alphabet, too.

Yes, there are words in natural languages, exclusively unique to those
languages, which can't be written in latin alphabet.

So, what are you suggesting ? That if the latin alphabet, can't
describe e.g. a russian word, then the klingon alphabet will ?

The solution is simple; you don't use these words. Greek has such
words too. Have I ever used them ? Things are simple: someone either
expresses himself staying *exclusively* within the confines of Ca'NoN,
or he just says "sorry guys, I can't find a way to express whatever,
so here is the english word".

Much more honest this way..

~ m. qunen'oS
Ca'NoN Ca'NoN Ca'NoN holiest