You shall not misinterpret Google to your own
advantages. Using Google I
come up with 121,000 "Quenya" results and
983,000 "Klingon" ones. Now
*that* is even more of a difference, isn't it?
No, it isn't, Andre :) . It's a difference of a factor of 10, which is the
same as my results. Only thing is: "Klingon" is the name of both the *race*
and the *language*. Quenya is only the name of the language. So naturally
'Klingon' gets more hits. To me, THAT seems a misinterpretation.
I was discussing with Mark the number of *fluent* speakers of Quenya vs
*fluent* speakers of Klingon. Naturally, fluent speakers are more likely to
use the Klingon word for "Klingon", just as fluent speakers of Quenya are
more likely to refer to 'Quenya' rather than "Elf-latin" (the English
term
for Quenya).
In other words, "Quenya" (the word for Tolkien's elf-latin IN elf-latin)
returns 121,000 results, and the the word for "Klingon" IN Klingon returns
far, far fewer results. I don't think that's a misinterpretation, as I was
simply discussing the number of fluent speakers of each language. I speak
Spanish, and when I'm speaking Spanish, I say "Hablo español,", not
"Hablo
Spanish."
I actually tried this google search with several words in both languages.
"Macil" (Quenya for "sword") returned 10,200 results.
"Makil", an alternate
spelling, returned 6,440 results. "Hyanda", another alternate, returned
3,430 results. " 'etlh", the Klingon word for sword, returned just 3,430
results.
"Aurë", Quenya "day" returned 4,350 results. "DaHjaj"
("today" in Klingon)
returned just 1,360 results.
I considered testing more words (for example, 'east', 'west',
'north' and
'south'), but Klingon doesn't have words for most of these directions. And
some Klingon words return results for Hebrew or Asian languages. Same for
Quenya. Which somewhat defeats the point of searching for results on google.
And I have to agree with Mark that there are in all
likelyhood more
speakers of Klingon than of Quenya (and perhaps even Sindarin).
Randomly
running into a Klingonist is more likely than finding someone who can
really say something in Quenya (that is to say, more than just some
phrases from the movies or the books).
I'm not sure I agree with this. Though the television media has always
mentioned Klingon frequently, it's important to note that Klingon was
*invented* by the television mass-media. So there's bound to be a bias.
Plus, your statement ignores the thousands of Russian Tolkien liguists (and
there *are* thousands).
Uhm... I might have to add that I'm not really
against a Wikipedia in
Quenya, but I fear that in future more and more conlangs
might ask for a
Wikipedia. Certainly Esperanto, Volapük or Interlingua isn't point of
objection, but I understand that Klingon was (although I support it
widely).
I can certainly understand that fear. Let me ask: how many conlangs have
devoted followings with workable languages (ie, a fairly full vocabulary:
approximately 10,000 words) and enough scholarly source material
(dictionaries, primers, etc) to back up translations? And people who speak
the tongue fluently who are willing to contribute many articles to
wikipedia? I actually don't know, but I suspect there can't be very many.
All JMHO, of course. And I could be wrong.
*My* biggest problems with the Klingon Wikipedia were
the following two
issues:
a) What to do with proper names like "America", "Peking" or
"George
Bush"? Should they be kept in their English equivalent (since in Star
Trek, Klingons had more contact with English speakers) and just be
italicized or marked {otherwise}? Or should they be klingonified and
adepted to the Klingon way of syllabic writing, such as "'amerIqa",
"peyqIng", "jorIj buS"? And if yes, then should geographic names be
klingonified in their own language's way or by the English way? Should
it be "peyqIng" and "'InDIya" or "beyjIng" and
"barat" instead?
b) What to do with words that don't exist in
Klingon/Quenya? I usually
tried to make them up from other words, like
"browser" ---> "page
viewer" and so on. Using loan words like "bIrawSer" or even
"browser" I
consider inappropriate.
These are good questions. As far as *Quenya* goes, I've always tried to NOT
translate proper names ("George Bush", etc), but whenever possible try to
find a workaround for words such as "browser", and most Quenya linguists are
the same, at least in that last respect.
Granted, these issues need not come up until the
Wikipedia is created
and editable, but I think it's worth mentioning...
That's all, just wanted
to bring up some constructive criticism.
And I appreciate your criticism. Thanks.
Ron (firsfron on wikipedia) :)