So like, they don't consider robots something that can use language? Or do these specific robots not speak language?
To qualify as the type you are thinking of, it must be both a "being" and "capable of language". I'm sure there are great philosophical debates about whether the most intelligent robots could count as a "being" and "capable of language". But in general they are not thought of as beings and they are though to really only parrot or imitate language. If you disagree you are welcome to us the pronouns and suffixes which indicate your personal beliefs. However, they will be marked wrong in this course.
I think I misunderstood the English. I had taken "being" to mean anything that has actual existence. In this sense, it is limited to organisms, then.
Sorry to add an unrelated question, but do you try to pronounce the two glottal stops right after each other in tI''egh, or do they simply merge into one glottal stop?
In English any word that begins with a vowel actually begins with the glottis closed. Thus, really, in English we never actually begin a word with a vowel, but instead begin those words with a glottal stop. For example, the word apple is really said 'apple. When pronouncing a Klingon word that begins with a glottal stop, just ignore it, your standard way of saying the vowel will put a glottal stop there.
When two glottal stops appear together in the middle of a word, the first one will always belong to the previous syllable and the second will always belong to the following syllable. The first one will cut off the vowel sound before it. Theoretically you should fully release the glottal stop and almost aspirate it. But most Klingon speakers, including Dr. Okrand just come to a full stop and do not give it an audible release. If you come to a full stop and hold the glottis closed, you can just launch into the vowel following the second '. If you do the full release then you will probably have to close the glottis again to start the next vowel, so it will just sound like a small stutter.
That sounds pretty much like what I do when I make a glottal stop between vowels, as in the Eastern New England pronunciation of "button."
when I try to pronounce them they get out something like: the first, as a sudden stop sometimes with some "echoing" of the preceding letter, and, the second, as an abrupt start. but that's in the good days, most of the times they get confused in a single cough ;-)
It's hard enough to get my mind around a double glottal stop, much less my throat.
There's an entire episode of TNG (The Meassure of a Man) where there's a court meeting for whether or not Data was considered a being. I know in that case it was ruled that yes he was a lifeform.
Oh I was just curious. Half the fun of Klingon is their cultural outlook. I thought maybe it was because they thought they didn't have souls so they didn't qualify as true intelligent beings.
Given that the only reason Klingons are spacefaring is because Romulans crash-landed on Qo'noS and the Klingons somehow managed to reverse-engineer the technology, I'd guess that Klingon technology hasn't resulted in AI yet. XD
If we were referring to an android such as Data, would qoqpu' be more correct? Assuming we wouldn't use a different word to begin with.
So you say! I'm not sure most Klingons would agree. Feel free to use the "being capable of language" pronouns and suffixes to show your support of his "personhood", but don't be surprised if the Klingons mostly go on using the "non-being/not-capable-of-language" pronouns and suffixes. Also, this course will use the "non-being/not-capable-of-language" pronouns and suffixes to refer to all qoqmey.
There are two problems with that. 1) There is no verb in that "sentence"? 2) There are two different -'a' makers one for nouns and one for verbs and they do two completely different things.
When the suffix -'a' appears on a verb (or a pronoun acting as a verb) it turns it from a statement into a yes/no question.
qoq 'oH'a' Data'e'? "Is Data a robot?"
qoq 'oH Data'e'. "Data is a robot."
When the suffix -'a' is attached to a noun, it augments the noun - it indicates that this is a major version of the thing or a greater version. For instance, a qep is a "meeting", but a qep'a' is a "conference".
I'm not sure quite what a qoq'a' would be, but I'd translate it as a "major robot". Since Data is so much more than just a robot, perhaps it is a good word for him.
Since there is no verb here, putting two nouns next two eachother doesn't form a sentence, but instead forms a noun phrase with the first noun describing the kind or type of the second noun.
qoq'a' Data. "Data of the major robot" "a major robot Data" or "the major robot's Data".
I think the question might be "qoq ghaH'a' data'e'?" but if one had a different attitude to him it might be "qoq 'oH'a' data'e'?" I'm still trying to figure out the copula-type sentences we get in the pronouns unit.