Is Star Trek: Discovery a new canon category?
We know that Okrand wasn't directly involved in Star Trek: Discovery, but that the production team went to great lengths and worked with Qov to make the dialogue properly Okrandian Klingon. We haven't seen the result, and maybe some things were edited in post-production and have to be retrofitted (like with the movies). My question is, would you consider the Klingon dialogue, etc., in Star Trek: Discovery to be Okrandian canon? These are the categories of Okrand-related canon that I can think of: 1. Things Okrand wrote or said himself (the books, tapes, interviews in HolQeD, reveals at the qep'a' and qepHom'a') 2. Things done by Klingonists in which Okrand had major involvement (paq'batlh... anything else in this category?) 3. Things done by Klingonists in which Okrand had some involvement (I'm not sure the extent of his involvement in Klingon Christmas Carol? Maybe that belongs in category #2?... TalkNow! Klingon, Festival of the Spoken Nerd) 4. Things done by non-Klingonists but licensed by Paramount/CBS (Keith R.A. DeCandido and a few other authors, the Haynes BoP book) 5. Things done by Klingonists with minimal involvement from Okrand but licensed by Paramount/CBS (Star Trek: Discovery) I guess maybe Star Trek: Discovery is similar to category #3, but it's still in its own category because it's on a STAR TREK TV SHOW, and thus (especially to the world outside of Klingonists) more "official". Are people going to accept sentences from Star Trek: Discovery as canonical Klingon? (For example, no objection if I use sentences from the show as examples in {boQwI'}?) -- De'vID
I'm sure this will create several different opinions. My short answer would be yes. I've had this question in mind already when the names came out at STLV - they were neither used on screen, nor published by Okrand, so following our rules, they are as canon as any of the our own klingon names we use on this list. Of all the things you have listed in your list, all of the accepted canon works are indeed BY Marc Okrand, or at least vetted by him. Anything else is not canon and should not be on the list. I believe that DSC opens a new kind of canon, but we should not separate it from the rest. The language is growing; so if Qov decided to translate something in a way we were not sure if it works, we must trust that she either aksed Maltz, or we just trust her doing it right. After all, the Klingon is used on screen, so it is canon from that point of view. Is it Okrandian canon? Not literally. But being "inside the game", what is spoken on DSC is spoken by a Klingon. And we all know that it will be good Klingon (no Bingon). I would not wish to see people begin splitting the language we speak in the "real" Klingon and the "new" Klingon, just like some fans argue that anything that came after the passing of Gene Roddenberry is not real Star Trek canon. Am 10.08.2017 um 20:17 schrieb De'vID:
1. Things Okrand wrote or said himself (the books, tapes, interviews in HolQeD, reveals at the qep'a' and qepHom'a')
I don't see so many difference in Canon as you separate them:
2. Things done by Klingonists in which Okrand had major involvement (paq'batlh... anything else in this category?)
This is cat. 1 for me, as the book says "translated by Okrand". He did a lot of work on this, even though not 100%, but he has obviously approved and/or vetted it.
3. Things done by Klingonists in which Okrand had some involvement (I'm not sure the extent of his involvement in Klingon Christmas Carol? Maybe that belongs in category #2?... TalkNow! Klingon, Festival of the Spoken Nerd)
AKCC does NOT count as canon to me, but TNK dfinitely does, Okrand approved all of it.
4. Things done by non-Klingonists but licensed by Paramount/CBS (Keith R.A. DeCandido and a few other authors, the Haynes BoP book)
Any of the Klingon used in there was approved by MO. If not, it's not canon.
5. Things done by Klingonists with minimal involvement from Okrand but licensed by Paramount/CBS (Star Trek: Discovery)
Yes, licensed, so it's canon. See my long comment above.
Are people going to accept sentences from Star Trek: Discovery as canonical Klingon? (For example, no objection if I use sentences from the show as examples in {boQwI'}?)
I would draw the line almost where Memory Alpha does: It's seen / heard on screen, so it's canon. (Except that they do not accept the spelling of Klingon, since that's not seen on screen, but that'S their problem. Of course we will accept the spelling). -- Lieven L. Litaer aka Quvar valer 'utlh Grammarian of the KLI http://www.facebook.com/Klingonteacher http://www.klingonwiki.net/En/Canon
On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 2:33 PM, Lieven <levinius@gmx.de> wrote:
This is cat. 1 for me, as the book says "translated by Okrand". He did a lot of work on this, even though not 100%, but he has obviously approved and/or vetted it.
Except for the parts that got changed that he didn't vet....
3. Things done by Klingonists in which Okrand had some involvement
(I'm not sure the extent of his involvement in Klingon Christmas Carol? Maybe that belongs in category #2?... TalkNow! Klingon, Festival of the Spoken Nerd)
AKCC does NOT count as canon to me, but TNK dfinitely does, Okrand approved all of it.
One might argue that since Okrand performed the play without making any changes (except for changes due to changing characters in the play) that he has vetted it as well. He made no corrections to the text. However, I don't consider it canon either. I only consider stuff translated/provided by Okrand alone as Canon. KCC, Talk Now, paq'batlh, Monopoly, etc are works created with his input, so they may be "correct", and may contain bits of canon, but they shouldn't be taken as canon on the whole. qurgh
On 10 August 2017 at 20:33, Lieven <levinius@gmx.de> wrote:
2. Things done by Klingonists in which Okrand had major involvement (paq'batlh... anything else in this category?)
This is cat. 1 for me, as the book says "translated by Okrand". He did a lot of work on this, even though not 100%, but he has obviously approved and/or vetted it.
I'm inclined to agree. I only separated it because it has some weird grammar and some people think the Klingon is of lower quality than category #1 canon.
3. Things done by Klingonists in which Okrand had some involvement (I'm not sure the extent of his involvement in Klingon Christmas Carol? Maybe that belongs in category #2?... TalkNow! Klingon, Festival of the Spoken Nerd)
AKCC does NOT count as canon to me, but TNK dfinitely does, Okrand approved all of it.
Well, when I worked on the Festival of the Spoken Nerd subtitles, I wrote the translations as best as I could using words we knew then, sent them to Okrand with requests about the gaps, and he replied back with suggestions or new words, for a few rounds. At the end he approved my translation, but I would only consider the words and definitions he supplied to be canon. The final subtitles, I would say, were my work (and not canon). Granted, this is different from TNK which is basically just a list of words and not full sentences. I don't know how much contact Qov had with Okrand about DSC, but the difference with DSC is of course that her work will appear on an official show. -- De'vID
On 8/10/2017 2:17 PM, De'vID wrote:
We know that Okrand wasn't directly involved in Star Trek: Discovery, but that the production team went to great lengths and worked with Qov to make the dialogue properly Okrandian Klingon. We haven't seen the result, and maybe some things were edited in post-production and have to be retrofitted (like with the movies).
My question is, would you consider the Klingon dialogue, etc., in Star Trek: Discovery to be Okrandian canon?
Qov is not Okrand, and so her translations are not Okrandian canon, unless he vetted them. -- SuStel http://trimboli.name
On 8/10/2017 2:17 PM, De'vID wrote:
My question is, would you consider the Klingon dialogue, etc., in Star Trek: Discovery to be Okrandian canon?
ja SuStel:
Qov is not Okrand, and so her translations are not Okrandian canon, unless he vetted them.
The other question would be: Would you accept the Qovian (?) Klingon as canon? Being in the game, would you accept her as the second person who is in direct contact with Maltz? What if Okrand has not vetted them, but just tells us to "trust her abilities"? Or will we classify this as canon, but some kind of other dialect? -- Lieven L. Litaer aka Quvar valer 'utlh Grammarian of the KLI http://www.klingonwiki.net/En/IsDiscoveryCanon ?
On 8/10/2017 2:57 PM, Lieven wrote:
On 8/10/2017 2:17 PM, De'vID wrote:
My question is, would you consider the Klingon dialogue, etc., in Star Trek: Discovery to be Okrandian canon?
ja SuStel:
Qov is not Okrand, and so her translations are not Okrandian canon, unless he vetted them.
The other question would be: Would you accept the Qovian (?) Klingon as canon? Being in the game, would you accept her as the second person who is in direct contact with Maltz?
What if Okrand has not vetted them, but just tells us to "trust her abilities"?
Or will we classify this as canon, but some kind of other dialect?
Without Okrand's vetting, I will accept it as /Star Trek/ canon (contradictory though much of it is) and not *tlhIngan Hol* canon. So far as I'm aware, Okrand has not delegated authority over the language to anyone. The "information from a Klingon informant and passes it on" game only survives so long as someone who is NOT playing the game is that authority. That person has to /invent,/ which is a very different thing than observing and describing. Okrand doesn't eagerly await pronouncements from Maltz; he invents them whenever he wants. If you're one of those people wanting pronouncements, and you become the authority, there's a HUGE conflict of interest there. Convincing someone that the KLI's New Words Page is legitimate Klingon, but Bob Smith's personal website of Klingon Words I Made Up is not, is hard enough, and you do it by saying that only the language's inventor comes up with it. Otherwise, we might as well agree that "quab jee nah geel" is Perfectly Good Klingon too. -- SuStel http://trimboli.name
Am 10.08.2017 um 21:07 schrieb SuStel:
Without Okrand's vetting, I will accept it as /Star Trek/ canon (contradictory though much of it is) and not *tlhIngan Hol* canon.
Am 10.08.2017 um 21:09 schrieb mayqel qunenoS:
If it isn't from 'oqranD, then it isn't canon.
Maybe not canon, but still some nice examples of good Klingon. As long as they're not wrong, we'll have some nice Klingon. It's some strange thing in between - it's less than okrandian canon, but still more than something that someone just wrote. It's on Star Trek. Difficult topic. But no problem. Anything that will be quoted has the mark "DSC" so anyone can handle it like they want. -- Lieven L. Litaer aka Quvar valer 'utlh Grammarian of the KLI http://www.facebook.com/Klingonteacher http://www.klingonwiki.net
On 8/10/2017 2:53 PM, SuStel wrote:
On 8/10/2017 2:17 PM, De'vID wrote:
We know that Okrand wasn't directly involved in Star Trek: Discovery, but that the production team went to great lengths and worked with Qov to make the dialogue properly Okrandian Klingon. We haven't seen the result, and maybe some things were edited in post-production and have to be retrofitted (like with the movies).
My question is, would you consider the Klingon dialogue, etc., in Star Trek: Discovery to be Okrandian canon?
Qov is not Okrand, and so her translations are not Okrandian canon, unless he vetted them.
Though I suspect that Okrand will be willing to point to anything Qov comes up with on /Discovery/ and say, "I asked Maltz about that and..." He could even retrofit any errors. -- SuStel http://trimboli.name
If it isn't from 'oqranD, then it isn't canon. The moment someone accepts anyone else's (other than 'oqranD) words/grammar, then his klingon stops being klingon. qunnoq On 10 Aug 2017 9:58 pm, "SuStel" <sustel@trimboli.name> wrote:
On 8/10/2017 2:53 PM, SuStel wrote:
On 8/10/2017 2:17 PM, De'vID wrote:
We know that Okrand wasn't directly involved in Star Trek: Discovery, but that the production team went to great lengths and worked with Qov to make the dialogue properly Okrandian Klingon. We haven't seen the result, and maybe some things were edited in post-production and have to be retrofitted (like with the movies).
My question is, would you consider the Klingon dialogue, etc., in Star Trek: Discovery to be Okrandian canon?
Qov is not Okrand, and so her translations are not Okrandian canon, unless he vetted them.
Though I suspect that Okrand will be willing to point to anything Qov comes up with on *Discovery* and say, "I asked Maltz about that and..." He could even retrofit any errors.
-- SuStelhttp://trimboli.name
_______________________________________________ tlhIngan-Hol mailing list tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org
The main questions for me are 1) To what extent does Qov work with Okrand? We know he (probably) made some new words for her. Does she also ask him for clarification on words with vague definitions or ones that haven't been used before? 2) What does Marc Okrand think? Given that potentially a lot of aspiring Klingonists are going to start from seeing the language used in DSC, it might be best to not discount it entirely. No sense in telling people "Yeah, that stuff you liked so much? It technically doesn't count." If you think about it, though, this sort of thing has already happened and it turned out fine. After all, a lot of what we call {no' Hol} (and for that matter, the original appearance of Klingon in ST:TMP) was originally written for the shows and movies by people who aren't Okrand, as either gibberish or well-meaning-but-lousy attempts at translation. Only later was it canonically retconned into being legitimate, though possibly from another time or dialect. Okrand seems to value making sure that every bit of Klingon shown on film is Real Klingon, even when he doesn't really have to. Qov's Klingon (Qovngon?) is the same sort of thing, except Okrand probably won't have to put as much effort into fitting her lines into existing canon. I mean, she's probably not going to make any mistakes on the level of {wIj jup}... In the end, I'll stick with whatever interpretation the KLI list ends up going with. But until then, my argument is this: even if Qov's lines weren't vetted by Okrand when she wrote them, he'll probably either sign off on them as-is eventually or have Maltz explain some difference between modern Klingon and what gets said on DSC. So if someone thinks of Qov's lines as "canon in some way eventually, even if we can't generalize from it yet", I don't think there's going to be huge issues. On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 2:17 PM, De'vID <de.vid.jonpin@gmail.com> wrote:
We know that Okrand wasn't directly involved in Star Trek: Discovery, but that the production team went to great lengths and worked with Qov to make the dialogue properly Okrandian Klingon. We haven't seen the result, and maybe some things were edited in post-production and have to be retrofitted (like with the movies).
My question is, would you consider the Klingon dialogue, etc., in Star Trek: Discovery to be Okrandian canon?
These are the categories of Okrand-related canon that I can think of:
1. Things Okrand wrote or said himself (the books, tapes, interviews in HolQeD, reveals at the qep'a' and qepHom'a') 2. Things done by Klingonists in which Okrand had major involvement (paq'batlh... anything else in this category?) 3. Things done by Klingonists in which Okrand had some involvement (I'm not sure the extent of his involvement in Klingon Christmas Carol? Maybe that belongs in category #2?... TalkNow! Klingon, Festival of the Spoken Nerd) 4. Things done by non-Klingonists but licensed by Paramount/CBS (Keith R.A. DeCandido and a few other authors, the Haynes BoP book) 5. Things done by Klingonists with minimal involvement from Okrand but licensed by Paramount/CBS (Star Trek: Discovery)
I guess maybe Star Trek: Discovery is similar to category #3, but it's still in its own category because it's on a STAR TREK TV SHOW, and thus (especially to the world outside of Klingonists) more "official".
Are people going to accept sentences from Star Trek: Discovery as canonical Klingon? (For example, no objection if I use sentences from the show as examples in {boQwI'}?)
-- De'vID _______________________________________________ tlhIngan-Hol mailing list tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org
On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 2:17 PM, De'vID <de.vid.jonpin@gmail.com> wrote:
Are people going to accept sentences from Star Trek: Discovery as canonical Klingon? (For example, no objection if I use sentences from the show as examples in {boQwI'}?)
I object. Why would you pick those sentences as examples, and not, for instance, sentences from Qo'noS QonoS? They're sentences created using Okrandian grammar, but they are not Okrandian sentences. We should not treat them as "correct by default". They very well could be worthy of emulation, but some of them might have accidental mispronunciations that didn't get caught in time, or might use controversial grammar, or might be intentionally aberrant for effect. I would enthusiastically accept any compilation of Klingon spoken on the show, but I would not want it to be treated with any sort of authority. We don't accept as canonical the invented idioms in the Klingon version of Hamlet, and we don't add to a dictionary the borrowed words in Much Ado About Nothing. Similarly, what makes it into the released episodes of Discovery should not change our textbooks. It's possible that a clever turn of phrase will turn out to catch the collective fancy of Klingon speakers, and thus influence how we say certain things, but I don't think that should be any more of an example than something from the Tao Te Ching. How would you answer if YOU were the one providing Klingon translations for the lines in Discovery scripts? -- ghunchu'wI'
One of the major differences between Discovery and Klingon Hamlet is that Discovery is going to be Actual Star Trek Canon. As far as the Star Trek fanbase at large is concerned, Qov's sentences are going to be as canonical as anything else on the shows and movies. If Qov writes "X is the way to say sentence Y in Klingon" and that's what the show uses as the translation, that's going to be treated as authoritatively as, say, the idea that you can get a deceased loved one into Sto-Vo-Kor by dedicating a glorious battle to them (like Worf did for Jadzia). How should we deal with that? Are we okay ignoring things depicted as Klingon Canon on the show? Like I said earlier, though, I'm not entirely sure it's a big deal. If Okrand ends up approving it as "real Klingon" in some way (either as standard "Maltz Hol" or an artifact of some dialect), like he's done with all the other stuff presented as Klingon on the show but not written by him, then I feel like the argument boils down to: Do we wait for him to share his thoughts on Qov's dialogue (at the next qep'a' or whenever) before accepting it? Or will it eventually be okay to just take a shortcut and accept it when it airs, and only wait for his thoughts on anything controversial? Of course, if Okrand wants to change his precedent and not approve this particular TV Klingon as real, {vaj may' bom pIm wIbom.} Has he said anything about this one way or another? On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 8:46 PM, Alan Anderson <qunchuy@alcaco.net> wrote:
On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 2:17 PM, De'vID <de.vid.jonpin@gmail.com> wrote:
Are people going to accept sentences from Star Trek: Discovery as canonical Klingon? (For example, no objection if I use sentences from the show as examples in {boQwI'}?)
I object. Why would you pick those sentences as examples, and not, for instance, sentences from Qo'noS QonoS?
They're sentences created using Okrandian grammar, but they are not Okrandian sentences. We should not treat them as "correct by default". They very well could be worthy of emulation, but some of them might have accidental mispronunciations that didn't get caught in time, or might use controversial grammar, or might be intentionally aberrant for effect. I would enthusiastically accept any compilation of Klingon spoken on the show, but I would not want it to be treated with any sort of authority. We don't accept as canonical the invented idioms in the Klingon version of Hamlet, and we don't add to a dictionary the borrowed words in Much Ado About Nothing. Similarly, what makes it into the released episodes of Discovery should not change our textbooks. It's possible that a clever turn of phrase will turn out to catch the collective fancy of Klingon speakers, and thus influence how we say certain things, but I don't think that should be any more of an example than something from the Tao Te Ching.
How would you answer if YOU were the one providing Klingon translations for the lines in Discovery scripts?
-- ghunchu'wI'
_______________________________________________ tlhIngan-Hol mailing list tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org
On 8/10/2017 10:28 PM, nIqolay Q wrote:
One of the major differences between Discovery and Klingon Hamlet is that Discovery is going to be Actual Star Trek Canon. As far as the Star Trek fanbase at large is concerned, Qov's sentences are going to be as canonical as anything else on the shows and movies.
Yes, as canonical as "quab jee nah geel." That's the canon of /Star Trek,/ not the canon of Okrand. They are not the same thing.
If Okrand ends up approving it as "real Klingon" in some way (either as standard "Maltz Hol" or an artifact of some dialect), like he's done with all the other stuff presented as Klingon on the show but not written by him,
Okrand has occasionally retconned something from S/tar Trek,/ but no way has he done this to "all the other stuff presented as Klingon on the show." I'd say he'd probably be more likely to retcon or confirm something by Qov, since he knows her and certain parties on this list will pester him about any perceived problem, but that's not a rubber stamp. -- SuStel http://www.trimboli.name/
On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 11:05 PM, SuStel <sustel@trimboli.name> wrote:
Yes, as canonical as "quab jee nah geel." That's the canon of *Star Trek,* not the canon of Okrand. They are not the same thing.
To quote KGT: "While the conventional phrases used in some rituals are uttered in modern Klingon (such as those used in the Rite of Ascension, a ceremony symbolizing a young Klinggon's attainment of a certain spiritual level), those used in a great many others are in a form of *no' Hol* (such as those associated with the *bIreqtal* [*brek'tal*], the ceremony in which the killer of the leader of a Klingon house marries the widow and thereby becomes the head of the house himself). In these cases, the phrases must be studied and memorized by the participants, then repeated back accurately. Improvising or paraphrasing is entirely inappropriate. Depending on when the phrases for the ritual originated, the words and grammatical constructions may be somewhat like or very different from those of modern Klingon. If the words have survived into modern Klingon but some of the grammatical features have not, it may sound as if the celebrant is speaking improper, ungrammatical Klingon. This is not the case, though the same phrase uttered away from the ritualistic context would be taken as such." I interpret this passage (and others from the same chapter) to mean that Okrand is taking the gibberish and bad translations from the shows (like, say, *Qab jIH ngIl*) and lumping them together in the general category of *no' Hol*, explaining away the use of bad grammar and pronunciation on the show as "well, they're just doing it like they did in the old days". He doesn't explain what the different grammar and pronunciation rules were like back then, or otherwise elaborate on the syntax of *Qab jIH ngIl*. But the aberrant grammar and pronunciation are nonetheless accounted for canonically as an archaic form of the language. In other words, "quab jee nah geel" *is* the canon of Okrand, though not in any way that relates to modern Klingon or that can really be learned from.
On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 10:28 PM, nIqolay Q <niqolay0@gmail.com> wrote:
One of the major differences between Discovery and Klingon Hamlet is that Discovery is going to be Actual Star Trek Canon.
It's going to be *Star Trek* canon. We already put a higher standard than that on canonical tlhIngan Hol. I believe the only thing that elevates something to that standard is having Marc Okrand produce it and/or put his name on it.
As far as the Star Trek fanbase at large is concerned, Qov's sentences are going to be as canonical as anything else on the shows and movies.
You mean like "nagosse tilo-g cha da!" for ending a marriage or "nooknay kaylogness" as a greeting? Fine, they'll be canonical Star Trek. I expect they will be exceptionally good, if not impeccable, tlhIngan Hol. I still don't believe they should be enshrined as "example sentences" alongside the Useful Klingon Expressions from TKD, the curses in PK, the proverbs in TKW, the idioms in KGT, etc.
If Qov writes "X is the way to say sentence Y in Klingon" and that's what the show uses as the translation, that's going to be treated as authoritatively as, say, the idea that you can get a deceased loved one into Sto-Vo-Kor by dedicating a glorious battle to them (like Worf did for Jadzia). How should we deal with that? Are we okay ignoring things depicted as Klingon Canon on the show?
Who's calling for them to be ignored? They should be embraced and celebrated, but they should not be exalted.
Of course, if Okrand wants to change his precedent and not approve this particular TV Klingon as real, {vaj may' bom pIm wIbom.} Has he said anything about this one way or another?
He doesn't "approve" everything seen on screen. We have no real way to incorporate "louk, a jee chim ta law" or "bIHnuch" into our knowledge of productive tlhIngan Hol rules and examples, for instance. Anything he *does* approve is worth recording in a dictionary or collection of examples to use for teaching, certainly. -- ghunchu'wI'
Am 11.08.2017 um 04:28 schrieb nIqolay Q:
One of the major differences between Discovery and Klingon Hamlet is that Discovery is going to be Actual Star Trek Canon.
There's the point: it's "Star Trek" canon, but still not pour Okrandian canon. Remember all the gibberish we'se seen on Deep Space nine? That certainly is canon, but wo don't even understand a word from it. Turning this around, did you know that the Star Trek wiki Memory Alpha does NOT consider {tlhIngan Hol} as canon? They regard only things seen on screen, so the books which we highly praise are non existent for them. Although I would love to see all Discovery phrases as being (our) canon, I must agree that these must be considered as a secondary work like Hamlet etc. -- at least until Marc Okrand puts his name under it confirming that he has checked and approved all of them. -- Lieven L. Litaer aka Quvar valer 'utlh Grammarian of the KLI http://www.klingonwiki.net/En/IsDiscoveryCanon ?
Am 11.08.2017 um 07:51 schrieb Lieven:
There's the point: it's "Star Trek" canon, but still not pour Okrandian canon.
No confusion intended: I mean "OUR Okrandian canon". DopDaq qul yIchenmoH ghobDI' ghu. -- Lieven L. Litaer aka Quvar valer 'utlh Grammarian of the KLI http://www.facebook.com/Klingonteacher http://www.klingonwiki.net
Unless a sentence comes from 'oqranD, then it isn't canon. I don't care if a friend of maltz wrote it, I don't care if the rest of the community considers this friend of maltz an expert; I don't care if kahless himself said it, if it isn't from 'oqranD it isn't canon. Even if God himself wrote it and told me "mayqel this is canon", I would not accept it. Sometime in the past, when I was writing in english and my words -according to an expert here-, didn't concern klingon, he wrote: "The hundreds of people on this list, didn't join in order to read your (whatever it was I was writing about)". So, rephrasing his warm and kind words, I will say that: "The hundreds of people on this list didn't join in order to learn a friend of maltz's klingon; they joined to learn okrandian klingon". And something else, because there is here an obvious confusion with regards to who-is-who.. Expert: Someone who knows everything and is able to provide correct and valid answers, in accordance to THE CANON WHICH ONLY OKRAND CREATES. So, unless 'oqranD says that he read/wrote/approved each and every klingon sentence and translation of it, I refuse to accept it as canon. qunnoq On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 9:07 AM, Lieven <levinius@gmx.de> wrote:
Am 11.08.2017 um 07:51 schrieb Lieven:
There's the point: it's "Star Trek" canon, but still not pour Okrandian canon.
No confusion intended: I mean "OUR Okrandian canon".
DopDaq qul yIchenmoH ghobDI' ghu.
-- Lieven L. Litaer aka Quvar valer 'utlh Grammarian of the KLI http://www.facebook.com/Klingonteacher http://www.klingonwiki.net
_______________________________________________ tlhIngan-Hol mailing list tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org
Am 11.08.2017 um 08:56 schrieb mayqel qunenoS:
Unless a sentence comes from 'oqranD, then it isn't canon. [..] So, unless 'oqranD says that he read/wrote/approved each and every klingon sentence and translation of it, I refuse to accept it as canon.
You write a little agitated, but I agree absolutley with you. Since that seems the general opinion here, I've written that into the Klingon language wiki, especially for future reference so that also newbies know that. http://www.klingonwiki.net/En/IsDiscoveryCanon -- Lieven L. Litaer aka Quvar valer 'utlh Grammarian of the KLI
lieven:
You write a little agitated, but I agree absolutley with you.
oh sorry ! I didn't realize that, and if I gave the impression that I am agitated I apologise. I was only trying to express my point. qunnoq On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 10:08 AM, Lieven <levinius@gmx.de> wrote:
Am 11.08.2017 um 08:56 schrieb mayqel qunenoS:
Unless a sentence comes from 'oqranD, then it isn't canon.
[..]
So, unless 'oqranD says that he read/wrote/approved each and every klingon sentence and translation of it, I refuse to accept it as canon.
You write a little agitated, but I agree absolutley with you.
Since that seems the general opinion here, I've written that into the Klingon language wiki, especially for future reference so that also newbies know that.
http://www.klingonwiki.net/En/IsDiscoveryCanon
-- Lieven L. Litaer aka Quvar valer 'utlh Grammarian of the KLI
_______________________________________________ tlhIngan-Hol mailing list tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org
Maybe you should make an exception for Kahless ;) In the Na'vi community, we also accept anything from Paul Frommer as canon. We also recognize anything on the (One so far) film as canon, but we do recognize that the pronunciation of some Na'vi is not necessarily correct. There are a very few words created by Na'vi language community members (and a few by the actors), that were later 'blessed' by Frommer, and are marked as being created by them in the lexicon. With the advent of the lexical expansion project though, all such community sourced words (and there are a lot of them now) are of anonymous contribution, and marked as Frommerian words. Tim Stoffel -- -----Original Message----- From: mayqel qunenoS <mihkoun@gmail.com> Reply-to: tlhingan-hol@kli.org To: tlhIngan Hol mailing list <tlhingan-hol@kli.org> Subject: Re: [tlhIngan Hol] Is Star Trek: Discovery a new canon category? Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2017 09:56:17 +0300 Unless a sentence comes from 'oqranD, then it isn't canon. I don't care if a friend of maltz wrote it, I don't care if the rest of the community considers this friend of maltz an expert; I don't care if kahless himself said it, if it isn't from 'oqranD it isn't canon. Even if God himself wrote it and told me "mayqel this is canon", I would not accept it. Sometime in the past, when I was writing in english and my words -according to an expert here-, didn't concern klingon, he wrote: "The hundreds of people on this list, didn't join in order to read your (whatever it was I was writing about)". So, rephrasing his warm and kind words, I will say that: "The hundreds of people on this list didn't join in order to learn a friend of maltz's klingon; they joined to learn okrandian klingon". And something else, because there is here an obvious confusion with regards to who-is-who.. Expert: Someone who knows everything and is able to provide correct and valid answers, in accordance to THE CANON WHICH ONLY OKRAND CREATES. So, unless 'oqranD says that he read/wrote/approved each and every klingon sentence and translation of it, I refuse to accept it as canon. qunnoq
Tim Stoffel:
Maybe you should make an exception for Kahless ;)
Hmm.. Qo'. tlhIngan Hol jatlh Qun'a'na' net jalchugh, vaj mu'meyDaj vIlajQo'; 'ej yInbej Qun'a'na'vam.. 'a yInbe' qeylIS. qunnoq On 11 Aug 2017 7:29 pm, "Tim Stoffel" <tim@lionlamb.us> wrote:
Maybe you should make an exception for Kahless ;)
In the Na'vi community, we also accept anything from Paul Frommer as canon. We also recognize anything on the (One so far) film as canon, but we do recognize that the pronunciation of some Na'vi is not necessarily correct. There are a very few words created by Na'vi language community members (and a few by the actors), that were later 'blessed' by Frommer, and are marked as being created by them in the lexicon. With the advent of the lexical expansion project though, all such community sourced words (and there are a lot of them now) are of anonymous contribution, and marked as Frommerian words.
Tim Stoffel
--
-----Original Message----- From: mayqel qunenoS <mihkoun@gmail.com> Reply-to: tlhingan-hol@kli.org To: tlhIngan Hol mailing list <tlhingan-hol@kli.org> Subject: Re: [tlhIngan Hol] Is Star Trek: Discovery a new canon category? Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2017 09:56:17 +0300
Unless a sentence comes from 'oqranD, then it isn't canon.
I don't care if a friend of maltz wrote it, I don't care if the rest of the community considers this friend of maltz an expert; I don't care if kahless himself said it, if it isn't from 'oqranD it isn't canon. Even if God himself wrote it and told me "mayqel this is canon", I would not accept it.
Sometime in the past, when I was writing in english and my words -according to an expert here-, didn't concern klingon, he wrote:
"The hundreds of people on this list, didn't join in order to read your (whatever it was I was writing about)".
So, rephrasing his warm and kind words, I will say that:
"The hundreds of people on this list didn't join in order to learn a friend of maltz's klingon; they joined to learn okrandian klingon".
And something else, because there is here an obvious confusion with regards to who-is-who..
Expert: Someone who knows everything and is able to provide correct and valid answers, in accordance to THE CANON WHICH ONLY OKRAND CREATES.
So, unless 'oqranD says that he read/wrote/approved each and every klingon sentence and translation of it, I refuse to accept it as canon.
qunnoq
_______________________________________________ tlhIngan-Hol mailing list tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org
On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 1:51 AM, Lieven <levinius@gmx.de> wrote:
Am 11.08.2017 um 04:28 schrieb nIqolay Q:
One of the major differences between Discovery and Klingon Hamlet is that Discovery is going to be Actual Star Trek Canon.
There's the point: it's "Star Trek" canon, but still not pour Okrandian canon. Remember all the gibberish we'se seen on Deep Space nine? That certainly is canon, but wo don't even understand a word from it.
The argument I'm making is that the reason we don't understand the gibberish from DS9 and elsewhere is because it is supposed to be considered canonically *no' Hol*, even the stuff that (coincidentally, I'm sure) sounds like someone doing a bad phonetic reading of modern Klingon words. The section on *no' Hol* (KGT p. 11-14) is written as if it's trying to reassure the reader that even if a Klingon says something that sounds like gibberish, it's actually perfectly acceptible as a contemporary use of ancient language. Okrand doesn't mention many examples of TV show gibberish specifically (though *mova' 'aqI' ruStaq* (KGT p. 13) is a line from "Looking For Par'Mach in All The Wrong Places" (DS9)), but it seems clear to me in retrospect that the digression on *no' Hol *was intended as a way to include all the TV gibberish in the canonical linguistic history without having to really make sense of it. Which is why I said earlier that all the stuff we've seen on TV and film has been incorporated into canonical Klingon, even if just as a more ancient form of the language.
On 11 August 2017 at 02:46, Alan Anderson <qunchuy@alcaco.net> wrote:
On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 2:17 PM, De'vID <de.vid.jonpin@gmail.com> wrote:
Are people going to accept sentences from Star Trek: Discovery as canonical Klingon? (For example, no objection if I use sentences from the show as examples in {boQwI'}?)
I object. Why would you pick those sentences as examples, and not, for instance, sentences from Qo'noS QonoS?
Simple: demographics. It's said that there are 30ish fluent speakers, a small fraction of which use {boQwI'}. Let's say it's 5, and that's probably an overestimate. (By definition no fluent speaker needs an app to look things up.) Of people who have opted in to provide app usage statistics, there are currently over 5000 30-day-active users (meaning people who have actually used the app within the last 30 days), and over 64000 total installs. Probably most of these people are casual fans, but at least some are beginner or intermediate Klingon learners. But in any case, there are three orders of magnitude more users of {boQwI'} than there are Klingonists who use it. Every time a movie comes out, people type the English subtitles into {boQwI'} to find out what the Klingon was and how it breaks down. Every time a book comes out with Klingon text, they type that into {boQwI'} to find out what it means. If things are missing, people email me to complain, which is how I know. If I don't include the Klingon dialogue searchable by the translated subtitles from DSC, I expect to get dozens of emails asking me why those sentences are missing. If I do include them, I expect approximately zero complaints from Klingonists. (The slight wrinkle is that if I do include them, a "certain someone" will most certainly post them to the mailing list to ask about their grammar, and name {boQwI'} as the source, and *then* Klingonists will complain that I included those sentences even though they're not canon.) If thousands of people were reading {Qo'noS QonoS}, I'd consider including sentences from it as examples, too.
How would you answer if YOU were the one providing Klingon translations for the lines in Discovery scripts?
Fortunately, I'm not. Perhaps I asked the wrong question. I don't necessarily consider Klingon from DSC to be Okrandian canonical Klingon until Okrand retroactively blesses it, but I'm going to (unless someone persuades me otherwise) include them in {boQwI'} anyway before he does so. I suppose the question really is, does anyone have a serious objection to {boQwI'} containing both Okrandian canon and good Klingon which conforms to Okrandian Klingon but which isn't from Okrand? Such entries will of course be marked as having come from DSC. -- De'vID
On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 9:22 AM, De'vID <de.vid.jonpin@gmail.com> wrote:
Perhaps I asked the wrong question. I don't necessarily consider Klingon from DSC to be Okrandian canonical Klingon until Okrand retroactively blesses it, but I'm going to (unless someone persuades me otherwise) include them in {boQwI'} anyway before he does so. I suppose the question really is, does anyone have a serious objection to {boQwI'} containing both Okrandian canon and good Klingon which conforms to Okrandian Klingon but which isn't from Okrand? Such entries will of course be marked as having come from DSC. <http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org>
It already does, though. The entry for {taH pagh taHbe'} contains the whole translation of the soliloquy; has anyone ever complained about that?
De'vID:
If I don't include the Klingon dialogue searchable by the translated subtitles from DSC, I expect to get dozens of emails asking me why those sentences are missing.
You could just write at the play google store, that boQwI' includes only okrandian canon. Or create a section at boQwI', where non-okrandian sentences are grouped together. As someone who wouldn't have learned klingon if it wasn't for boQwI', I have to say that I wouldn't like seeing side by side, okrand and not-okrand sentences. Let alone that an additional problem will possibly arise: If you do include DSC non-okrand sentences for beginners, then these are the same beginners who will be confused, if and when okrand disqualifies something written in those sentences. qunnoq On 11 Aug 2017 4:25 pm, "nIqolay Q" <niqolay0@gmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 9:22 AM, De'vID <de.vid.jonpin@gmail.com> wrote:
Perhaps I asked the wrong question. I don't necessarily consider Klingon from DSC to be Okrandian canonical Klingon until Okrand retroactively blesses it, but I'm going to (unless someone persuades me otherwise) include them in {boQwI'} anyway before he does so. I suppose the question really is, does anyone have a serious objection to {boQwI'} containing both Okrandian canon and good Klingon which conforms to Okrandian Klingon but which isn't from Okrand? Such entries will of course be marked as having come from DSC. <http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org>
It already does, though. The entry for {taH pagh taHbe'} contains the whole translation of the soliloquy; has anyone ever complained about that?
_______________________________________________ tlhIngan-Hol mailing list tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org
On 8/11/2017 9:40 AM, mayqel qunenoS wrote:
If you do include DSC non-okrand sentences for beginners, then these are the same beginners who will be confused, if and when okrand disqualifies something written in those sentences.
That's a good point. Okrand retains the power to disqualify anything Qov writes, while Qov presumably doesn't have the power to disqualify anything Okrand writes. -- SuStel http://www.trimboli.name/
Am 11.08.2017 um 15:40 schrieb mayqel qunenoS:
If you do include DSC non-okrand sentences for beginners, then these are the same beginners who will be confused, if and when okrand disqualifies something written in those sentences.
All of this is just speculation, since we do not know the phrases yet. De'vID is right that people may search for what they heard on the show. Theoretically, if ALL that Qov has translated is just fine, following the grammar, with no confusion - then why should we not show it? The note that it's not canon from Okrand may still be added. And besides, boQwI' has the option to add notes saying what is incorrect - it even does with canon examples that have mistakes. -- Lieven L. Litaer aka Quvar valer 'utlh Grammarian of the KLI http://www.facebook.com/Klingonteacher http://www.klingonwiki.net
lieven:
Theoretically, if ALL that Qov has translated is just fine, following the grammar, with no confusion - then why should we not show it?
In that case I want to ask, to include in boQwI' every other sentence every other grammarian has ever written. If we note at the end of the entry "written by grammarian x, at that date and instance", then there isn't a problem, right ? Speaking for myself, I trust SuStel and lojmIt tI'wI' nuv more than Qov. So, why include her sentences and exclude theirs, or yours ? You're a grammarian, right ? Why should I study Qov's sentences, and not yours ? See my point ? The moment we accept anyone else's sentences as "material which should be studied", then we place ourselves on a slippery path. qunnoq On 11 Aug 2017 4:53 pm, "Lieven" <levinius@gmx.de> wrote: Am 11.08.2017 um 15:40 schrieb mayqel qunenoS:
If you do include DSC non-okrand sentences for beginners, then these are the same beginners who will be confused, if and when okrand disqualifies something written in those sentences.
All of this is just speculation, since we do not know the phrases yet. De'vID is right that people may search for what they heard on the show. Theoretically, if ALL that Qov has translated is just fine, following the grammar, with no confusion - then why should we not show it? The note that it's not canon from Okrand may still be added. And besides, boQwI' has the option to add notes saying what is incorrect - it even does with canon examples that have mistakes. -- Lieven L. Litaer aka Quvar valer 'utlh Grammarian of the KLI http://www.facebook.com/Klingonteacher http://www.klingonwiki.net _______________________________________________ tlhIngan-Hol mailing list tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org
On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 10:04 AM, mayqel qunenoS <mihkoun@gmail.com> wrote:
lieven:
Theoretically, if ALL that Qov has translated is just fine, following the grammar, with no confusion - then why should we not show it?
In that case I want to ask, to include in boQwI' every other sentence every other grammarian has ever written.
boQwI' contains a number of entries which aren't Okrand canon (and they are marked as not being by Okrand). There's the {taH pagh taHbe'} speech from Hamlet, the "Blood was ankle deep" drinking song from DS9 (whose lyrics are described as "not grammatical in modern standard Klingon, since they are ancient"), a few words used in novels and the like (marked as "extended canon: use with caution!"), and so on. My guess is that the intent is to include non-canonical words or passages that beginners may nonetheless have already heard of in some context other than KLI-approved Klingon, so they can find information about them (including their non-canonical status) when they come to look them up. In this case, beginners coming to boQwI' from DSC might look up lines from the show, and if those beginners find entries saying "this is a line from DSC, it's probably okay but it's not by Okrand" that will probably be more useful to them than finding no results at all and wondering why. The majority of people who use boQwI' aren't die-hard Klingon fans like us. (I was surprised when I first read that from De'vID. I hadn't really anticipated the possibly that someone could be interested in Klingon without going all-in.) It's quite likely that they aren't going to know about the canon/non-canon distinction beforehand unless they are told. Speaking for myself, I trust SuStel and lojmIt tI'wI' nuv more than Qov.
So, why include her sentences and exclude theirs, or yours ? You're a grammarian, right ? Why should I study Qov's sentences, and not yours ?
Lots of people are going to be interested in Qov's sentences, because they are going to be broadcast to potentially hundreds of thousands of people, who have been told that it's all legitimate Klingon by the producers of DSC. Conversely, almost nobody outside the mailing list is going to be interested in the things SuStel or lojmIt or you or me or even Qov have said here unless they're reading the mailing list archives. No aspiring Klingonist is going to come across (for example) my recent translation of "The Second Coming" on the Internet somewhere and then hit up boQwI' looking for more details. Including Qov's sentences in boQwI' would at least provide an opportunity to get out in front of the issue, and help beginners understand that these sentences aren't canonical. (And, to reiterate... has anybody asked Okrand for his thoughts on the matter?)
I see your point. However, boQwI' is meant to be a helping tool, in order to learn okrandian klingon, not a star trek klingon guide. Anyway, the final decision is of course De'vID's.. qunnoq jan puqloD On 11 Aug 2017 5:55 pm, "nIqolay Q" <niqolay0@gmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 10:04 AM, mayqel qunenoS <mihkoun@gmail.com> wrote:
lieven:
Theoretically, if ALL that Qov has translated is just fine, following the grammar, with no confusion - then why should we not show it?
In that case I want to ask, to include in boQwI' every other sentence every other grammarian has ever written.
boQwI' contains a number of entries which aren't Okrand canon (and they are marked as not being by Okrand). There's the {taH pagh taHbe'} speech from Hamlet, the "Blood was ankle deep" drinking song from DS9 (whose lyrics are described as "not grammatical in modern standard Klingon, since they are ancient"), a few words used in novels and the like (marked as "extended canon: use with caution!"), and so on.
My guess is that the intent is to include non-canonical words or passages that beginners may nonetheless have already heard of in some context other than KLI-approved Klingon, so they can find information about them (including their non-canonical status) when they come to look them up. In this case, beginners coming to boQwI' from DSC might look up lines from the show, and if those beginners find entries saying "this is a line from DSC, it's probably okay but it's not by Okrand" that will probably be more useful to them than finding no results at all and wondering why.
The majority of people who use boQwI' aren't die-hard Klingon fans like us. (I was surprised when I first read that from De'vID. I hadn't really anticipated the possibly that someone could be interested in Klingon without going all-in.) It's quite likely that they aren't going to know about the canon/non-canon distinction beforehand unless they are told.
Speaking for myself, I trust SuStel and lojmIt tI'wI' nuv more than Qov.
So, why include her sentences and exclude theirs, or yours ? You're a grammarian, right ? Why should I study Qov's sentences, and not yours ?
Lots of people are going to be interested in Qov's sentences, because they are going to be broadcast to potentially hundreds of thousands of people, who have been told that it's all legitimate Klingon by the producers of DSC.
Conversely, almost nobody outside the mailing list is going to be interested in the things SuStel or lojmIt or you or me or even Qov have said here unless they're reading the mailing list archives. No aspiring Klingonist is going to come across (for example) my recent translation of "The Second Coming" on the Internet somewhere and then hit up boQwI' looking for more details. Including Qov's sentences in boQwI' would at least provide an opportunity to get out in front of the issue, and help beginners understand that these sentences aren't canonical.
(And, to reiterate... has anybody asked Okrand for his thoughts on the matter?)
_______________________________________________ tlhIngan-Hol mailing list tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org
On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 11:06 AM, mayqel qunenoS <mihkoun@gmail.com> wrote:
I see your point.
However, boQwI' is meant to be a helping tool, in order to learn okrandian klingon, not a star trek klingon guide.
It is a helping tool, and a damn fine one at that. The issue here is this: boQwI' is used primarily by beginners and casual Klingonists, and it's quite likely that many of them don't even *know* there's any difference between Okrandian Modern Klingon and what gets used in the show. They just know there's such a thing as an actual Klingon language and assume all the Klingon they see and hear is part of it. Having an entry for that sort of "gibberish Klingon" will help them realize the difference without having to ask De'vID about it each time something they heard on the show doesn't come up in the boQwI' search results.
On 11 August 2017 at 16:54, nIqolay Q <niqolay0@gmail.com> wrote:
Lots of people are going to be interested in Qov's sentences, because they are going to be broadcast to potentially hundreds of thousands of people, who have been told that it's all legitimate Klingon by the producers of DSC.
The best case scenario for the Klingonist community would be that DSC generates a huge amount of publicity for the Klingon language. When the show airs, people are going to be searching for "What did L'Rell say to Voq in episode 3?" or "how do I learn Klingon?". Is the KLI prepared for this? -- De'vID
On 11 August 2017 at 15:40, mayqel qunenoS <mihkoun@gmail.com> wrote:
De'vID:
If I don't include the Klingon dialogue searchable by the translated subtitles from DSC, I expect to get dozens of emails asking me why those sentences are missing.
You could just write at the play google store, that boQwI' includes only okrandian canon.
I have a Klingon Text-To-Speech engine on the Google Play Store, and the description says very clearly what it is. I still get comments on the review page and emails saying things like "I installed your app, how come my Maps isn't giving me directions in Klingon?" The point is, very few people read the app description beyond its name. The typical user of the app has no idea who Marc Okrand is, but they are aware that a real Klingon language exists which someone actually invented for CBS/Paramount. (By the way, a surprising number of people think that someone is James Doohan.) If I put something about Okrandian Klingon in the app description, nobody outside of a few people will even understand what this means.
Let alone that an additional problem will possibly arise:
If you do include DSC non-okrand sentences for beginners, then these are the same beginners who will be confused, if and when okrand disqualifies something written in those sentences.
I agree that this is a problem, but I expect it not to be a serious one. If the producers really did put as much effort into the spoken Klingon for the show as it appears, then almost all of the spoken Klingon will be proper Okrandian Klingon. In that case, it will be trivial for Okrand to okay them as correct Klingon. It's possible that Qov or an actor/actress makes a mistake, or the producers edit things around, but I'm hoping that's kept to a minimum. To my knowledge, Okrand has never "disqualified" Klingon spoken in any show or movie. At most, he's said that it's some dialect or ceremonial phrase. If the Klingon on DSC is mostly correct and there are just minor errors, Okrand can easily explain these without much effort. -- De'vID
On Aug 11, 2017, at 6:20 PM, De'vID <de.vid.jonpin@gmail.com> wrote:
If the producers really did put as much effort into the spoken Klingon for the show as it appears, then almost all of the spoken Klingon will be proper Okrandian Klingon.
I guess I don't get the point of putting it in boQwI'. If it is proper Okrandian Klingon, it will be things that are already in the app. If it is not, then it shouldn't be included as an example. I don't have an Android computer so I have no idea how boQwI' presents examples. If it's just a separate section of the program that lists the lines and translations, then that would not offend me. But if the user is searching for words and gets results that mix Hamlet or Discovery or Gilgamesh in with material from TKD and KGT, I would consider that inappropriate. Anyway, nobody should be asking what the Klingon on the show means. If it is intended to mean anything, it will be subtitled. If someone wants to know what the individual Klingon words are, they can all be looked up. -- ghunchu'wI'
On 12 August 2017 at 00:58, ghunchu'wI' 'utlh <qunchuy@alcaco.net> wrote:
On Aug 11, 2017, at 6:20 PM, De'vID <de.vid.jonpin@gmail.com> wrote:
If the producers really did put as much effort into the spoken Klingon for the show as it appears, then almost all of the spoken Klingon will be proper Okrandian Klingon.
I guess I don't get the point of putting it in boQwI'. If it is proper Okrandian Klingon, it will be things that are already in the app. If it is not, then it shouldn't be included as an example.
You're assuming that the look-up will be done in Klingon. Most of the time, it will be in English. Say some Star Trek fan with a passing interest in Klingon hears some Klingon dialogue on a show and is curious to know what it is. They may have a copy of the Klingon dictionary and even skimmed through it. The subtitle says "Surrender or die!" (which, for the sake of argument, is a sentence which has never appeared in canon before). What did the character say? "bee jegh... or is that jeH or jeQ?" They're going to look up "Surrender or die!", and then go, "Aha! So that's what he said!" If {bIjeghbe'chugh vaj bIHegh} isn't an entry, this won't happen. The components of the *Klingon* sentence will already be in the app. But that doesn't mean the average Joe/Jane Star Trek viewer will be able to find them using the *English* subtitles.
I don't have an Android computer so I have no idea how boQwI' presents examples. If it's just a separate section of the program that lists the lines and translations, then that would not offend me. But if the user is searching for words and gets results that mix Hamlet or Discovery or Gilgamesh in with material from TKD and KGT, I would consider that inappropriate.
There are no lines from Gilgamesh (unless by coincidence). The soliloquy from Hamlet is there, but the entry name is {taH pagh taHbe'.} "To be or not to be." That is, if you search either that Klingon or English phrase, an entry will show up containing the entire soliloquy, but you can't find it by searching another line from the soliloquy itself. The intention with DSC is to add the spoken lines as entry names, so that they can be searched. (Maybe not all of them, since if there are a lot I may just not have the time.)
Anyway, nobody should be asking what the Klingon on the show means. If it is intended to mean anything, it will be subtitled. If someone wants to know what the individual Klingon words are, they can all be looked up.
Obviously, nobody should be asking what the Klingon means, but that's not the use case here. The use case is not looking up individual Klingon words, it's looking up the words together using the English translation of the entire sentence. -- De'vID
vuD rur 'eQway; 'e' lughaj Hoch. 'ej 'eQway vIghaj je. po'ba' Qov. 'ach, ...
From this list's FAQ:
2.10 I just heard Worf say ooga-booga to Dax. What does that mean? (Joel Peter Anderson) Short Answer: 1) Unless the context of the show makes it clear, we don't know . 2) Unless Marc Okrand explains or defines it in terms of tlhIngan Hol , most Klingonists will not use it. Long Answer:
From time to time, Trek shows use language identified as "Klingon", but apparently don't care to refer to the well known language delineated by Marc Okrand. Practically speaking, the constraints of doing a weekly show are tremendous (any weekly show). It shouldn't be surprising that the producers don't worry too much about getting the language right.
Since Okrand himself does refer to other dialects and tongues within the empire, this is not unacceptable, we may pass it off as some other language of the Warrior race. On rare occassions Okrand has backfit terms from the Trek shows into his work. So, generally the "odd" Klingon words heard on Trek shows (or used in occasonal Trek novels) are: 1) From Klingon tongues we don't know 2) Slang or colloquial usage not yet catalogued in TKD et al tlhIngan Hol sources. 3) Random noise used by artistic license to stand in for real Klingon. Since the KLI concentrates its focus on the language as defined by Marc Okrand, most Klingonists assume option 3 and ignore them, unless such oddities are approved by Okrand.
On 11 August 2017 at 02:46, Alan Anderson <qunchuy@alcaco.net> wrote:
How would you answer if YOU were the one providing Klingon translations for the lines in Discovery scripts?
Well, now that it's been made public that you're Qov's backup translator and you provided some of the lines, that puts your question in a different context. :-) On 11 August 2017 at 15:22, De'vID <de.vid.jonpin@gmail.com> wrote:
Of people who have opted in to provide app usage statistics, there are currently over 5000 30-day-active users (meaning people who have actually used the app within the last 30 days), and over 64000 total installs. Probably most of these people are casual fans, but at least some are beginner or intermediate Klingon learners. But in any case, there are three orders of magnitude more users of {boQwI'} than there are Klingonists who use it.
Just to give an update on this. There was a 94% increase in downloads of {boQwI'} in the past 7-day period compared to the week before, and a 41% increase for the 30-day period compared to the previous one. Something which I didn't expect was that the episodes have Klingon subtitles, thanks to Lieven. (Only on Netflix, though, so they're not available in the US or Canada, unfortunately). So instead of searching for things in English, users have actually been typing the subtitles *in Klingon* into {boQwI'} to break down their constituent parts. There was another use case which I hadn't anticipated: people are using {boQwI'} to *listen to* the text-to-speech engine repeat the lines spoken on the show. Many people apparently can't understand the spoken Klingon in the show even with Klingon subtitles, so they're listening to the TTS-generated version for comparison. (The stats for the TTS downloads are 107% over the last 7-day period, and 74% over the last 30-day.) In other words, the TTS engine is being used as a tool for people to learn to understand spoken Klingon. On 12 August 2017 at 00:58, ghunchu'wI' 'utlh <qunchuy@alcaco.net> wrote:
I guess I don't get the point of putting it in boQwI'. If it is proper Okrandian Klingon, it will be things that are already in the app. If it is not, then it shouldn't be included as an example.
If a sentence is included in {boQwI'}, the entry can be annotated to provide a breakdown of its components and grammar. If a sentence isn't included, {boQwI'} will try to analyse it, but it doesn't understand things like homophones (e.g., it will provide both "be quiet" and "exchange, substitute" in its analysis for {yItamchoH!}). Another wrinkle is that the TTS will only speak sentences which are included in the database. It can still speak the individual parts of any sentence which isn't included, but it just means the user has to listen to each part separately, so it won't flow smoothly. I completely understand and agree with the need to keep Okrandian canon separate from stuff produced by other people. When I originally started {boQwI'}, it was a canon database. But the user base has other ideas. If you joined the Klingon language community early on, and you were lucky enough to be able to attend the qep'a' and converse with other speakers, subscribe to HolQeD, and so on, you may not appreciate how difficult it is for a beginner now to pick up all of the vocabulary or develop an ear for spoken Klingon. There are thousands of people out there who are interested enough in the spoken Klingon on Discovery to the degree that they're trying to convert what they hear into written Klingon so they can break down the parts and understand them, and I want to make their entry into fully learning Klingon as easy as possible. (I don't want to annoy beginners with notes about canon they won't understand, but I also don't want to annoy experts by mixing canon and non-canon material, so the DSC stuff will be marked, but not in a very obtrusive way.) I think there's a huge opportunity for the KLI here, to produce with CBS (after the season, or the series, is over) a book of annotated transcripts for all the Klingon language dialogue in the show, with commentary by Qov and yourself on word choice, grammar, etc., some comments from Marc Okrand, interviews with the Klingon actors and voice coach, a glossary/dictionary in the back collecting the vocabulary used on the show, with lots of glossy pictures of the cast and language experts. It can accompany the "making of" video segment for the Klingon language parts of the show. (I was going to suggest that this could be included in the book as a DVD, but nowadays I guess it should just be streamed online.) There's clearly a market for something like this. -- De'vID
De'vID:
If you joined the Klingon language community early on, and you were lucky enough to be able to attend the qep'a' and converse with other speakers, subscribe to HolQeD, and so on, you may not appreciate how difficult it is for a beginner now to pick up all of the vocabulary or develop an ear for spoken Klingon.
De'vID is right, and I agree 100%. Speaking for myself, I wouldn't have learned klingon if it wasn't for boQwI'. And it is my belief, that no app has contributed more to the klingon beginner, than boQwI'. mayqel q On Oct 2, 2017 11:35, "De'vID" <de.vid.jonpin@gmail.com> wrote:
On 11 August 2017 at 02:46, Alan Anderson <qunchuy@alcaco.net> wrote:
How would you answer if YOU were the one providing Klingon translations for the lines in Discovery scripts?
Well, now that it's been made public that you're Qov's backup translator and you provided some of the lines, that puts your question in a different context. :-)
On 11 August 2017 at 15:22, De'vID <de.vid.jonpin@gmail.com> wrote:
Of people who have opted in to provide app usage statistics, there are currently over 5000 30-day-active users (meaning people who have actually used the app within the last 30 days), and over 64000 total installs. Probably most of these people are casual fans, but at least some are beginner or intermediate Klingon learners. But in any case, there are three orders of magnitude more users of {boQwI'} than there are Klingonists who use it.
Just to give an update on this. There was a 94% increase in downloads of {boQwI'} in the past 7-day period compared to the week before, and a 41% increase for the 30-day period compared to the previous one.
Something which I didn't expect was that the episodes have Klingon subtitles, thanks to Lieven. (Only on Netflix, though, so they're not available in the US or Canada, unfortunately). So instead of searching for things in English, users have actually been typing the subtitles *in Klingon* into {boQwI'} to break down their constituent parts.
There was another use case which I hadn't anticipated: people are using {boQwI'} to *listen to* the text-to-speech engine repeat the lines spoken on the show. Many people apparently can't understand the spoken Klingon in the show even with Klingon subtitles, so they're listening to the TTS-generated version for comparison. (The stats for the TTS downloads are 107% over the last 7-day period, and 74% over the last 30-day.) In other words, the TTS engine is being used as a tool for people to learn to understand spoken Klingon.
On 12 August 2017 at 00:58, ghunchu'wI' 'utlh <qunchuy@alcaco.net> wrote:
I guess I don't get the point of putting it in boQwI'. If it is proper Okrandian Klingon, it will be things that are already in the app. If it is not, then it shouldn't be included as an example.
If a sentence is included in {boQwI'}, the entry can be annotated to provide a breakdown of its components and grammar. If a sentence isn't included, {boQwI'} will try to analyse it, but it doesn't understand things like homophones (e.g., it will provide both "be quiet" and "exchange, substitute" in its analysis for {yItamchoH!}). Another wrinkle is that the TTS will only speak sentences which are included in the database. It can still speak the individual parts of any sentence which isn't included, but it just means the user has to listen to each part separately, so it won't flow smoothly.
I completely understand and agree with the need to keep Okrandian canon separate from stuff produced by other people. When I originally started {boQwI'}, it was a canon database. But the user base has other ideas. If you joined the Klingon language community early on, and you were lucky enough to be able to attend the qep'a' and converse with other speakers, subscribe to HolQeD, and so on, you may not appreciate how difficult it is for a beginner now to pick up all of the vocabulary or develop an ear for spoken Klingon. There are thousands of people out there who are interested enough in the spoken Klingon on Discovery to the degree that they're trying to convert what they hear into written Klingon so they can break down the parts and understand them, and I want to make their entry into fully learning Klingon as easy as possible. (I don't want to annoy beginners with notes about canon they won't understand, but I also don't want to annoy experts by mixing canon and non-canon material, so the DSC stuff will be marked, but not in a very obtrusive way.)
I think there's a huge opportunity for the KLI here, to produce with CBS (after the season, or the series, is over) a book of annotated transcripts for all the Klingon language dialogue in the show, with commentary by Qov and yourself on word choice, grammar, etc., some comments from Marc Okrand, interviews with the Klingon actors and voice coach, a glossary/dictionary in the back collecting the vocabulary used on the show, with lots of glossy pictures of the cast and language experts. It can accompany the "making of" video segment for the Klingon language parts of the show. (I was going to suggest that this could be included in the book as a DVD, but nowadays I guess it should just be streamed online.) There's clearly a market for something like this.
-- De'vID
_______________________________________________ tlhIngan-Hol mailing list tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org
I also agree with mayqel, that boQwI' is an amazing tool. I think part of the new downloads is also due to me advertising the app in my Klingon courses in Switzerland. When someone asked me for the translation of a difficult word in the course, and I had to look it up on my computer dictionary, another participant already found it in boQwI'. Unfortunately it doesn't exist for iPhone, many of my students (maybe 60%) use iPhone. By the way, I didn't see where I can activate or deactivate usage statistics in the app on my phone? Isn't it in the preferences? Maybe I overlooked it... And for the cannon vs. non-cannon debate, a bright dangerous-looking warning label could be put into the entries or sentences that are not cannon, with a very brief but clear warning. Another idea: If people really like listening to Klingon so much, maybe you could add the option to write or copy whole texts into a sort of simplified text editor (maybe with the function of marking misspellings or non-Klingon words), which than would be read out aloud. People could then enter any phrases they come across, on TV, in courses, books, etc. - André 2017-10-02 10:35 GMT+02:00 De'vID <de.vid.jonpin@gmail.com>:
On 11 August 2017 at 02:46, Alan Anderson <qunchuy@alcaco.net> wrote:
How would you answer if YOU were the one providing Klingon translations for the lines in Discovery scripts?
Well, now that it's been made public that you're Qov's backup translator and you provided some of the lines, that puts your question in a different context. :-)
On 11 August 2017 at 15:22, De'vID <de.vid.jonpin@gmail.com> wrote:
Of people who have opted in to provide app usage statistics, there are currently over 5000 30-day-active users (meaning people who have actually used the app within the last 30 days), and over 64000 total installs. Probably most of these people are casual fans, but at least some are beginner or intermediate Klingon learners. But in any case, there are three orders of magnitude more users of {boQwI'} than there are Klingonists who use it.
Just to give an update on this. There was a 94% increase in downloads of {boQwI'} in the past 7-day period compared to the week before, and a 41% increase for the 30-day period compared to the previous one.
Something which I didn't expect was that the episodes have Klingon subtitles, thanks to Lieven. (Only on Netflix, though, so they're not available in the US or Canada, unfortunately). So instead of searching for things in English, users have actually been typing the subtitles *in Klingon* into {boQwI'} to break down their constituent parts.
There was another use case which I hadn't anticipated: people are using {boQwI'} to *listen to* the text-to-speech engine repeat the lines spoken on the show. Many people apparently can't understand the spoken Klingon in the show even with Klingon subtitles, so they're listening to the TTS-generated version for comparison. (The stats for the TTS downloads are 107% over the last 7-day period, and 74% over the last 30-day.) In other words, the TTS engine is being used as a tool for people to learn to understand spoken Klingon.
On 12 August 2017 at 00:58, ghunchu'wI' 'utlh <qunchuy@alcaco.net> wrote:
I guess I don't get the point of putting it in boQwI'. If it is proper Okrandian Klingon, it will be things that are already in the app. If it is not, then it shouldn't be included as an example.
If a sentence is included in {boQwI'}, the entry can be annotated to provide a breakdown of its components and grammar. If a sentence isn't included, {boQwI'} will try to analyse it, but it doesn't understand things like homophones (e.g., it will provide both "be quiet" and "exchange, substitute" in its analysis for {yItamchoH!}). Another wrinkle is that the TTS will only speak sentences which are included in the database. It can still speak the individual parts of any sentence which isn't included, but it just means the user has to listen to each part separately, so it won't flow smoothly.
I completely understand and agree with the need to keep Okrandian canon separate from stuff produced by other people. When I originally started {boQwI'}, it was a canon database. But the user base has other ideas. If you joined the Klingon language community early on, and you were lucky enough to be able to attend the qep'a' and converse with other speakers, subscribe to HolQeD, and so on, you may not appreciate how difficult it is for a beginner now to pick up all of the vocabulary or develop an ear for spoken Klingon. There are thousands of people out there who are interested enough in the spoken Klingon on Discovery to the degree that they're trying to convert what they hear into written Klingon so they can break down the parts and understand them, and I want to make their entry into fully learning Klingon as easy as possible. (I don't want to annoy beginners with notes about canon they won't understand, but I also don't want to annoy experts by mixing canon and non-canon material, so the DSC stuff will be marked, but not in a very obtrusive way.)
I think there's a huge opportunity for the KLI here, to produce with CBS (after the season, or the series, is over) a book of annotated transcripts for all the Klingon language dialogue in the show, with commentary by Qov and yourself on word choice, grammar, etc., some comments from Marc Okrand, interviews with the Klingon actors and voice coach, a glossary/dictionary in the back collecting the vocabulary used on the show, with lots of glossy pictures of the cast and language experts. It can accompany the "making of" video segment for the Klingon language parts of the show. (I was going to suggest that this could be included in the book as a DVD, but nowadays I guess it should just be streamed online.) There's clearly a market for something like this.
-- De'vID
_______________________________________________ tlhIngan-Hol mailing list tlhIngan-Hol@lists.kli.org http://lists.kli.org/listinfo.cgi/tlhingan-hol-kli.org
I notice Qov has not weighed in on this attempt to make Qovian canon equal to Okrandian canon.
Is she still on this list? She hasn't posted in quite some months. ---Voragh -----Original Message----- From: tlhIngan-Hol [mailto:tlhingan-hol-bounces@lists.kli.org] On Behalf Of SuStel I notice Qov has not weighed in on this attempt to make Qovian canon equal to Okrandian canon. _______________________________________________
participants (12)
-
Alan Anderson -
André Müller -
De'vID -
ghunchu'wI' 'utlh
-
Lieven -
mayqel qunenoS -
Michael Roney, Jr. -
nIqolay Q -
qurgh lungqIj -
Steven Boozer -
SuStel -
Tim Stoffel