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) :)