Can {ja'} be used to mean “read aloud”, e.g., to describe the functionality of TTS software, or is it more proper to use {jatlh} for this? In other words, are the following two options equally acceptable, or is either one considered more correct than the other, to express something like “say it to me” to a computer? a) {HIja'} b) {jIHvaD yIjatlh} Background behind the question; you don’t need to read this to answer, but it might help explain why I’m asking: the iOS port of {boQwI'} has been rejected from App Store review, with the claim that it doesn’t provide any functionality beyond what a mobile optimized website (including websites that take advantage of HTML5 offline storage) could provide. While this is technically true, this could also be said of the overwhelming majority of apps on my phone, and likely the majority of apps on the App Store in general, so I don’t know why {boQwI'} fails this review criterion while other apps that seemingly provide less functionality than {boQwI'} pass it. I am in the process of appealing the rejection, but in case the appeal fails I am planning to add additional functionality so that the app can pass this review criterion. After considering some of the possible options, I have decided that the path of least resistance would be to add TTS functionality similar to what the original {boQwI'} app provides when the optional Klingon TTS engine is installed. It is, of course, possible to provide TTS functionality in a mobile website, but to preemptively address this concern, the TTS feature will be exposed via an iOS action extension, so that you can access it from another app by selecting text and sending it to the action extension. I will then plumb the action extension through to {boQwI'} so that it can use a feature that would not otherwise be available to a mobile website. I am hoping that I can call the TTS app and the extension it exposes {HIja'}, as a pun meaning “tell me” and also “yes”, but I don’t know whether the semantics of {ja'} allow for this, or whether {HIja'} can only mean “tell me” in the sense of “report a piece of information to me” and not “say something to me”. On a somewhat related note, does anybody know whether the fact that {HIja'} means “tell me” in addition to meaning “yes” is intentional?
On 3/29/2018 8:25 AM, Daniel Dadap wrote:
Can {ja'} be used to mean “read aloud”, e.g., to describe the functionality of TTS software, or is it more proper to use {jatlh} for this? In other words, are the following two options equally acceptable, or is either one considered more correct than the other, to express something like “say it to me” to a computer?
a) {HIja'} b) {jIHvaD yIjatlh}
First, a side-note: *HIjatlh* is allowed by use of the prefix trick. To me, a strict reading of the entries for *jatlh* and *ja'* suggest that *jatlh* is about the act of making speech, while *ja'* is about the act of imparting information. In /Star Trek III,/ we get *qaja'pu' jonta' neH*/I told you engines only./ The emphasis here is clearly on the information imparted, rather than the saying of it. On the other hand, in the same movie Kruge says, in English, "Say the wrong thing, Torg..." And we just /happen/ to get the phrase *bIjatlhHa'chugh*/If you misspeak/ in /The Klingon Dictionary./ This is, of course, not a coincidence, because Okrand translated every line by a Klingon whether it ended up being said in Klingon or not. Here, the emphasis is purely on whether Torg says something Kruge doesn't want to hear, not on whatever information he has to impart. This is not to say that you can't impart information when you *jatlh* or be speaking when you *ja'.* It's just a matter of focus. I feel fairly confident in this distinction, but it remains only my opinion.
I am hoping that I can call the TTS app and the extension it exposes {HIja'}, as a pun meaning “tell me” and also “yes”, but I don’t know whether the semantics of {ja'} allow for this, or whether {HIja'} can only mean “tell me” in the sense of “report a piece of information to me” and not “say something to me”.
I don't think *ja'* only means to provide with information; it means to talk or communicate in a way that provides information. Consider the word *ja'chuq* /discuss, confer./ It's not that the subjects are just shooting off data at each other; it means they're having a conversation. I don't know whether a pun would be good in this application; I think it would just be confusing, as most people seeing *HIja'* will associate it with /yes/ far sooner than they will with /tell me!/ I'm also not sure I see the value of the pun—why would it be funny to interpret it as /yes/ in that particular context?
On a somewhat related note, does anybody know whether the fact that {HIja'} means “tell me” in addition to meaning “yes” is intentional?
I'm sure it wasn't intentional. -- SuStel http://trimboli.name
On Thu, Mar 29, 2018 at 9:12 AM, SuStel <sustel@trimboli.name> wrote:
In *Star Trek III,* we get *qaja'pu' jonta' neH** I told you engines only.* The emphasis here is clearly on the information imparted, rather than the saying of it.
I thought the original line was *qama'pu' jonta' neH*, and *ma'* originally meant "order, command", until it was changed to help cover up the retcon of a whole sentence.
On 3/29/2018 9:25 AM, nIqolay Q wrote:
On Thu, Mar 29, 2018 at 9:12 AM, SuStel <sustel@trimboli.name <mailto:sustel@trimboli.name>> wrote:
In /Star Trek III,/ we get *qaja'pu' jonta' neH*/I told you engines only./ The emphasis here is clearly on the information imparted, rather than the saying of it.
I thought the original line was *qa/ma'/pu' jonta' neH*, and *ma'* originally meant "order, command", until it was changed to help cover up the retcon of a whole sentence.
Right, I'm mixing up the final line with the original one. TKD has *qaja'pu' HIqaghQo'*/I told you not to interrupt me./ -- SuStel http://trimboli.name
On 29 March 2018 at 15:25, nIqolay Q <niqolay0@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, Mar 29, 2018 at 9:12 AM, SuStel <sustel@trimboli.name> wrote:
In Star Trek III, we get qaja'pu' jonta' neH I told you engines only. The emphasis here is clearly on the information imparted, rather than the saying of it.
I thought the original line was qama'pu' jonta' neH, and ma' originally meant "order, command", until it was changed to help cover up the retcon of a whole sentence.
I thought {ma'} used to be "say, tell" (hence the translation of "I told you, engines only") -- and {-pu'} was simply past tense then. Later the meaning of {ma'} was changed, as you say, and it is now "accommodate". I've heard a rumour that this particular meaning is because Marc Okrand accommodated the writers' change in the sentence, but I haven't been able to confirm that. Cheers, Philip -- Philip Newton <philip.newton@gmail.com>
That's exactly the story I heard from marqoS and Holtej (d'Armond Speers) years ago in the early days of this list. -- Voragh Ca'Non Master of the Klingons -----------------------------------Original Message----------------------------------- From: Philip Newton On 29 March 2018 at 15:25, nIqolay Q <niqolay0@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, Mar 29, 2018 at 9:12 AM, SuStel <sustel@trimboli.name> wrote:
In Star Trek III, we get qaja'pu' jonta' neH "I told you engines only." The emphasis here is clearly on the information imparted, rather than the saying of it.
I thought the original line was qama'pu' jonta' neH, and ma' originally meant "order, command", until it was changed to help cover up the retcon of a whole sentence.
I thought {ma'} used to be "say, tell" (hence the translation of "I told you, engines only") -- and {-pu'} was simply past tense then. Later the meaning of {ma'} was changed, as you say, and it is now "accommodate". I've heard a rumour that this particular meaning is because Marc Okrand accommodated the writers' change in the sentence, but I haven't been able to confirm that. http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org
On 4/18/2018 8:06 AM, Philip Newton wrote:
I thought {ma'} used to be "say, tell" (hence the translation of "I told you, engines only") -- and {-pu'} was simply past tense then.
Later the meaning of {ma'} was changed, as you say, and it is now "accommodate". I've heard a rumour that this particular meaning is because Marc Okrand accommodated the writers' change in the sentence, but I haven't been able to confirm that.
I believe we heard Okrand tell this very story at qep'a' wejDIch. -- SuStel http://trimboli.name
Thanks for the analysis.
On Mar 29, 2018, at 9:12 AM, SuStel <sustel@trimboli.name> wrote:
On 3/29/2018 8:25 AM, Daniel Dadap wrote:
Can {ja'} be used to mean “read aloud”, e.g., to describe the functionality of TTS software, or is it more proper to use {jatlh} for this? In other words, are the following two options equally acceptable, or is either one considered more correct than the other, to express something like “say it to me” to a computer?
a) {HIja'} b) {jIHvaD yIjatlh}
First, a side-note: HIjatlh is allowed by use of the prefix trick.
To me, a strict reading of the entries for jatlh and ja' suggest that jatlh is about the act of making speech, while ja' is about the act of imparting information.
In Star Trek III, we get qaja'pu' jonta' neH I told you engines only. The emphasis here is clearly on the information imparted, rather than the saying of it.
On the other hand, in the same movie Kruge says, in English, "Say the wrong thing, Torg..." And we just happen to get the phrase bIjatlhHa'chugh If you misspeak in The Klingon Dictionary. This is, of course, not a coincidence, because Okrand translated every line by a Klingon whether it ended up being said in Klingon or not. Here, the emphasis is purely on whether Torg says something Kruge doesn't want to hear, not on whatever information he has to impart.
This is not to say that you can't impart information when you jatlh or be speaking when you ja'. It's just a matter of focus. I feel fairly confident in this distinction, but it remains only my opinion.
If I understand you correctly, your interpretation is that using {HIja’} to mean “say it to me” with respect to TTS software would seem a bit off, since the focus of the normal operation TTS software would be on the conversion of a piece of information from written text into speech, rather than on the imparting of that information as speech, but there’s nothing explicitly disallowing it.
I am hoping that I can call the TTS app and the extension it exposes {HIja'}, as a pun meaning “tell me” and also “yes”, but I don’t know whether the semantics of {ja'} allow for this, or whether {HIja'} can only mean “tell me” in the sense of “report a piece of information to me” and not “say something to me”.
I don't think ja' only means to provide with information; it means to talk or communicate in a way that provides information. Consider the word ja'chuq discuss, confer. It's not that the subjects are just shooting off data at each other; it means they're having a conversation.
I don't know whether a pun would be good in this application; I think it would just be confusing, as most people seeing HIja' will associate it with yes far sooner than they will with tell me! I'm also not sure I see the value of the pun—why would it be funny to interpret it as yes in that particular context?
Creating confusion is exactly the point of the pun. I have a slightly perverse sense of humor.
On a somewhat related note, does anybody know whether the fact that {HIja'} means “tell me” in addition to meaning “yes” is intentional? I'm sure it wasn't intentional.
It very well may not have been intentional. I was sort of hoping that it was. My slightly perverse sense of humor gave me the initial impression (in speculative Klingon linguistic history) that perhaps {HIja’} meaning “yes” was etymologically derived from saying {HIja’} (“tell me”) to express that the speaker concurs with what was just said (in the vein of e.g. “amen"), and morphed to {HISlaH} as a variant.
-- SuStel http://trimboli.name <http://trimboli.name/>_______________________________________________ tlhIngan-Hol mailing list tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org
participants (5)
-
Daniel Dadap -
nIqolay Q -
Philip Newton -
Steven Boozer -
SuStel