[Tlhingan-hol] Bad Klingon in Trek novels (and the like)

Fri Aug 10 17:16:58 PDT 2012

ghItlhta' Qov,
> [sensible stuff]

Yeah, you're probably right. I tried something a bit like that, I feel, but it's hard to do in snippets of 140 characters.
I should probably write some sort of summary, throw it up on the web and direct people there when that rumor comes up, and then they can decide for themselves if they find it worth looking into; saves both sides some trouble.

Anyhow, sorry for the rant, people; I let my frustration get the best of me.
First rule of e-mailing while frustrated: Don't e-mail while frustrated. :)

________________________________________
From: Robyn Stewart [robyn at flyingstart.ca]
Sent: Saturday, August 11, 2012 01:18
To: Felix Malmenbeck
Cc: tlhIngan Hol mailing list
Subject: Re: [Tlhingan-hol] Bad Klingon in Trek novels (and the like)

I think my approach would be to say, "I have quite a lot of knowledge of things Klingon and I know of two projects to translate the bible into Klingon. Ine was undertaken by the Klingon Language Institute using human speakers and working from the original languages, and the other was done by [I assume you know whom] using a for entertainment only app produced by Mr. Klingon. Which project were you referring to?" He names one, the other, a third one, or he doesn't know. You ask for a reference if he names the third. You say that you do know, if je doesn't, and you explain as required the state of the other translations. From one point of view, the terrible machine translation is a translation, just as those terrible Chinese film dubs are technically translations. Rather than attacking the piece of information on which he is feeling confident of his knowledge, add to his knowledge by explaining that it is a horrible machine translation that no Klingon speaker who is not also a huge fan of cryptic crosswords could decipher. Show him an example. End with his knowledge being increased and not his Sovqoq being taken away.

But on the other hand yeah, try to relax about ignorance of Klingon. You could probably find equal ignorance regarding  dozens of natural languages. One could go crazy every time someone declares Inuktitut has 200 words for snow, but it's really not worth it. Next time send the offender your favourite bible passage in Klingon. Good Klingon.

- Qov

On 2012-08-10, at 16:31, Felix Malmenbeck <felixm at kth.se> wrote:

> Heads-up warning: This is a bit of a rant e-mail, and most of it is probably more than a bit whiny. However, I think it's relevant to the discussion, and I feel the need to get it off my chest:
>
> ------------
>
> I've just had a very unpleasant conversation on Twitter over the Klingon bible. I know obsessing over people being wrong on the internet is usually futile, but sometimes I just can't help myself.
>
> I noticed that somebody had posted the question: "True or false? The Bible has been translate dinto Klingon."
> So, seeing as he had asked, and since I knew the answer, I replied "False: There's an ungrammatical machine translation, but only parts have been properly translated. http://klv.mrklingon.org"
>
> I see this claim very often, and I sometimes point out that it's false (because my reasoning is that when you make that claim, it indicates at least some interest in its truth value). Sometimes people appreciate that, and that's nice, and sometimes they ignore me, and that's fine.
>
> This instance would have been simple enough, but then the guy replied "It's true..."
>
> I wasn't sure what he was saying was true (the original postulate, or my negation thereof), but I checked his profile and noticed he was telling everybody who'd responded that the correct answer was "True".
>
> This struck a nerve with me; I don't usually mind people being wrong (and if it's clear they're not interested, I usually don't bother correcting them), but when they defend their errors and pass them on to others ... I get frustrated.
>
> So I responded "ghobe'. teHbe'. {No. It's false.}", to indicate I knew what I was talking about.
> I then added "To clarify: The Klingon Language Institute used to have a project to translate the Bible, but only a few passages were done."
>
> To which he responded "Seriously, I'm now losing the will to live.. it was true!"
>
> ...and that's where I made the mistake of responding "Nope; it was and remains false.", and it really went south from there, ending with him repeatedly calling me an arse and blocking me.
>
> You can see the full fall-out hee, if you're interested:
> http://people.kth.se/~felixm/KlingonBible2.png
>
>
> So, why am I posting this? Three main reasons:
>
> 1) I felt the need to vent. (Sorry!)
> 2) To ask the question: When is it worth pointing out misunderstandings about Klingon? Taking this conversation as an example, is there somewhere you feel I should have simply backed off?
>
> ...and 3) To ask the more personal question: WAS I being an arse?
> That's not a rhetorical question; the guy I was talking to seems intelligent enough, and I'd really like to know what it is I did to invite such a harsh reaction from him. So, if you look at the conversation and notice somewhere where you think I was being uncivil, feel free to let me know (either on or off the list).
>
> ________________________________________
> From: Felix Malmenbeck [felixm at kth.se]
> Sent: Tuesday, August 07, 2012 10:25
> To: Michael Roney, Jr. PKT; tlhIngan Hol mailing list
> Subject: Re: [Tlhingan-hol] Bad Klingon in Trek novels (and the like)
>
> Regarding the UTA and KLV Bible:
>
> I can definitely see why people would be frustrated by the errors that arise because of this. However, I do think it should be noted that Joel appears to have done his very best to make sure the language isn't misrepresented; turns out it's not always enough, but he has written fairly extensively on the subject.
>
> I also wonder: Are these misunderstandings inescapable, or could one perhaps send an e-mail to the creator with some suggested changes that would help avert them?
> (Like "When the 'translated' text shows up, also show a big text saying: '<font color="#FF0000"><u>WARNING</u></font>: This is <u><i>NOT</i></u> an accurate translation! For details, click [LINK]." or "On Amazon, perhaps you can put the stuff about the KLV being inaccurate at the beginning of the info text.")
>
> In that case, and if it has not already been done, then it's an option that really needs to be explored before we bring out the harsh language.
>
>
>> I'd like to applaud the efforts of Keith R. A. DeCandido for his
>> excellent use of the language.
>> (And for naming a ship after my daughter!)
>> He has certainly taken the time to understand what he's doing.
>
> Yeah, he's great in that way; he really incorporates the language quite seamlessly into his books. [If I were a Trek author, I fear I'd spend more pages on background info than story.]
>
> He's also very responsive on Twitter (@KRADeC); I've asked him several times about the lore in his Klingon novels, and he's been happy to oblige.
>
> It does seem he has a very real fondness for his Klingon stories; you can listen to him talking about them in a recent podcast here: http://kradical.livejournal.com/2573796.html
>
>
> ________________________________________
> From: Michael Roney, Jr. PKT [nahqun at gmail.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, August 07, 2012 07:55
> To: tlhIngan Hol mailing list
> Subject: Re: [Tlhingan-hol] Bad Klingon in Trek novels (and the like)
>
> In response to Trek authors using Klingon:
>
> I'd like to applaud the efforts of Keith R. A. DeCandido for his
> excellent use of the language.
> (And for naming a ship after my daughter!)
> He has certainly taken the time to understand what he's doing.
>
> That said, one of his books refers to {QongDaqpu'}.
> Which reminded me of a scene in The Final Reflection where a kuve
> contorts her body into a chair/bean bag to be sat upon.
> (It's been a while, so forgive my memory.)
>
> While it would certainly make for an interesting story to have one's
> bed be a sentient life form; that's not what his intent was.
> (I know, I e-mailed him about it.)
>
>
> However, Michael A. Martin's use of the language was grating.
> He used the words correctly enough; but he went out of his way to
> explain them in English as well.
>
> It's like watching a program for a pre-schooler where the host says a
> phrase in Spanish, to someone who only speaks Spanish, and then
> translates it into English for them.
>
> I understood you the first time!
>
>
> In response to MrKlingon
>
> I have no problem with Joel, the person.
>
> A while back, it came to his attention that I was compiling all of the
> scraps of Klingon Bible translations from around the web.
>
> He PM'd be to see if I had used any of his.
>
> I'd rather eat dead qagh.
>
> He understood, and said that he would've been surprised if I had been .
>
> And there's supposed to be a link to a Human translator on his site,
> but it seems to be broken.
>
> ~'anan naHQun
>
> --
> ~Michael Roney, Jr.
> Professional Klingon Translator
> webOS Developer
>
> http://www.twitter.com/roneyii
> http://www.google.com/s2/profiles/110546798564536163288
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tlhingan-hol mailing list
> Tlhingan-hol at stodi.digitalkingdom.org
> http://stodi.digitalkingdom.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tlhingan-hol mailing list
> Tlhingan-hol at stodi.digitalkingdom.org
> http://stodi.digitalkingdom.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tlhingan-hol mailing list
> Tlhingan-hol at stodi.digitalkingdom.org
> http://stodi.digitalkingdom.org/mailman/listinfo/tlhingan-hol