Re: new Klingon spelling

From:    Costentin Cornomorus <elemtilas@...>
> So, I guess I just don't understand what
> the problem with /ajr&k/ really is. Unless
> there's some weird charge of racism or
> antisemitism going on that I'm not aware of.
Certainly not.

> > That is, the English
> > speakers' ignorance of Arabic lead them to
> > arbitrarily assign
> > values based not on anything to do with their
> > internal grammar of
> > English, but with the social conventions
> > associated with English orthography.
>
> Of course! We (English users) are under
> absolutely NO obligation to even consider how
> foreigners pronounce their own names. If they
> expect that nicety, they can jolly well give
> themselves anglofriendly names! ;)
You're missing the point.  The point was that it doesn't matter
what one is *obliged* to do.  It *can* matter what one ought to
do out of respect for other individuals, as a *practical*
matter to signal your openness to foreign cultures.  I am not
obliged in any or all circumstances, by law or by some ethical
code, to treat others kindly if they interpret some act as unkind.
However, there are people in the world who like their name, or that
of their country, or that of their city, or whatever else they
identify with, pronounced as people in their community pronounce it.
The fact that some people do not care about this doesn't get rid
of the fact that some do. It usually takes virtually no effort
to note how words are pronounced, and if it would take extra
effort, you can just ask the person and be sure to use that
in his or her presence in the future.

> > (Personally, aside from these issues, I find it
> > disrespectful not to make an effort to pronounce the latter
> > category of terms as it would be in the source language.
>
> I find it totally unnecessary. Why should I
> expect Spaniards to call me /@'merIkEn/ and not
> estadounidense or norteamericano? That's alittle
> beyond. They speak Spanish, not English.
These are, however, not proper names in the sense that they do not
select out a unique individual.

> > It's not "wrong", except
> > insofar as it is "wrong" not to take into
> > consideration other
> > people's cultures as valid just as your own.
>
> This has nothing to do with cultural equality.
I never said it did.  What I did say -- that it signals your
respect for the culture of your interlocutor -- is a practical
and entirely different matter.

> And if we need to make thát argument, is not our
> own American way (pronouncing foreigners' country
> names according to our own language's rules) just
> as valid? Sauce for the goose, meseems.
You are again entirely missing the point. I was not arguing about
what is right or just (I explicitly denied that); I was arguing
about what practical effects certain kinds of behavior can have.
And let me tell you:  there are plenty of people out there who
disagree with you, and on that ground alone whether you are
justified in your opinion or not, they will interpret you as
offending them.  When in Rome, do as the Romans do!  (Where
"being in Rome" is "being in someone's presence whose name you
may need to pronounce".)  The point is not to needlessly offend
others when it is entirely in your power to do so at entirely
minimal or negligible cost as in this case.  (The latter clause
is important, since I'm not asking others to go out of their
way to act thus.)

 =========================================================================
Thomas Wier            "I find it useful to meet my subjects personally,
Dept. of Linguistics    because our secret police don't get it right
University of Chicago   half the time." -- octogenarian Sheikh Zayed of
1010 E. 59th Street     Abu Dhabi, to a French reporter.
Chicago, IL 60637