The thing that’s always bothered me about that metaphoric language is that to learn it you would need to be told the stories the metaphors refer to, which means there would have to be a more basic language for telling the actual stories. Then the metaphors would make sense. Same as understanding “gaslight” or “dog whistle” etc.
There was a great thread on Daystrom on Reddit about this. The theory is they have 3 languages. Basically, the bare function words taught to children and in which the stories are told. The main language of metaphors with which we are familiar. And a language of technical jargon. Until they have learnt the stories, language A can be used as a general purpose language for children, but it would be regarded as baby talk by adults except when used for its functional purpose in telling metaphors. The jargon would be necessary even at higher levels.
Holy crap! Except for the technical language this is the exact theory I came up with.
For amusement here’s my theory of why TNG Klingons don’t look like TOS Klingons: The Klingons first acquired warp drive from some unfortunate alien scientists who landed on their planet. The Klingons killed them and copied their technology, immediately conquering and subjugating every nearby system they could find. Like the ancient Romans, they expanded their empire beyond their ability to govern it. Logistics problems and power struggles on the home planet left many troops stranded on frontier planets, where they eventually settled down and went native. By the time the central government got its shit together and reasserted itself, generations of interbreeding had created Klingons who hardly looked Klingon anymore. Being on the fringes of the Empire, these were the Klingons Kirk’s generation interacted with, who are seen in TOS. After years of infighting over the status of the “halfbreeds”, the matter was finally settled. Certain distinguished warriors were allowed to undergo modification to look more “normal” - as we see Kang return in TNG. To a racially proud civilization this entire affair is a source of tremendous embarrassment - so as Worf said in the DS9 tribble episode, “We do not speak of it.”
I think this theory got trashed by canon at some point, but back in the 90s everybody I told it to thought it was a totally reasonable explanation.
Honestly the Klingon thing is the sort of thing I don’t feel needs a serious canon explanation. If I had been alive pre-TNG my preferred explanation would have been “they look different because they had different production budgets. In-lore they haven’t changed.”
It’s the same with Star Wars for me. I never cared for the fancy explanations for Han doing the Kessel Run in under 12 parsecs. Up until the Solo movie, my headcanon was just that Han was bullshitting. It fits his character, it doesn’t require some weird space-fantasy explanation. And best of all, it fits the suspicious reaction Obi-Wan gives after he says it.
I think it’s also why the visuals of the Klingon look in Discovery never bothered me. It always seemed like just another increase in budget and modern production design to the same fundamental design they’ve always had, the same way TNG improved upon TOS.
The problem with the 12 parsecs thing didn’t come from G-canon though. It was in extended universe, and later in the Solo movie, where the black holes explanation came in and removed the ability to interpret it as Han bullshitting.
Oh yeah for sure. But this goes back to the other discussion I was having about Doylist vs Watsonian explanations. For this sort of issue, I strongly prefer to have a Watsonian explanation that we can use. And there is an official Watsonian explanation…it’s just a dumb and unsatisfying one compared to the one I prefered.
Yeah no I get that, and normally I’m a big fan of finding Watsonian explanations for writing decisions rather than just accepting that something was done for production reasons or because of a studio note or some other Doylist reason. But for whatever reason when it comes specifically to visual changes I tend not to care as much.
A fun and well imagined notion for their “transformation.” Of course, as is the law of “Trek pedantry,” it was hypothesized in DS9 “Trials and Tribble-ations” by Dr. Bashir and confirmed in ENT to be the result of viral manipulation gone awry.
I had forgotten what they came up with but yeah it was the virus thing. I still think a history-based explanation would have been a lot more interesting.
I bet they only talk that way in the presence of outsiders. On their own, they must have a basic structured language while also utilizing metaphors memes where appropriate.
The thing that’s always bothered me about that metaphoric language is that to learn it you would need to be told the stories the metaphors refer to, which means there would have to be a more basic language for telling the actual stories. Then the metaphors would make sense. Same as understanding “gaslight” or “dog whistle” etc.
There was a great thread on Daystrom on Reddit about this. The theory is they have 3 languages. Basically, the bare function words taught to children and in which the stories are told. The main language of metaphors with which we are familiar. And a language of technical jargon. Until they have learnt the stories, language A can be used as a general purpose language for children, but it would be regarded as baby talk by adults except when used for its functional purpose in telling metaphors. The jargon would be necessary even at higher levels.
Holy crap! Except for the technical language this is the exact theory I came up with.
For amusement here’s my theory of why TNG Klingons don’t look like TOS Klingons: The Klingons first acquired warp drive from some unfortunate alien scientists who landed on their planet. The Klingons killed them and copied their technology, immediately conquering and subjugating every nearby system they could find. Like the ancient Romans, they expanded their empire beyond their ability to govern it. Logistics problems and power struggles on the home planet left many troops stranded on frontier planets, where they eventually settled down and went native. By the time the central government got its shit together and reasserted itself, generations of interbreeding had created Klingons who hardly looked Klingon anymore. Being on the fringes of the Empire, these were the Klingons Kirk’s generation interacted with, who are seen in TOS. After years of infighting over the status of the “halfbreeds”, the matter was finally settled. Certain distinguished warriors were allowed to undergo modification to look more “normal” - as we see Kang return in TNG. To a racially proud civilization this entire affair is a source of tremendous embarrassment - so as Worf said in the DS9 tribble episode, “We do not speak of it.”
I think this theory got trashed by canon at some point, but back in the 90s everybody I told it to thought it was a totally reasonable explanation.
Honestly the Klingon thing is the sort of thing I don’t feel needs a serious canon explanation. If I had been alive pre-TNG my preferred explanation would have been “they look different because they had different production budgets. In-lore they haven’t changed.”
It’s the same with Star Wars for me. I never cared for the fancy explanations for Han doing the Kessel Run in under 12 parsecs. Up until the Solo movie, my headcanon was just that Han was bullshitting. It fits his character, it doesn’t require some weird space-fantasy explanation. And best of all, it fits the suspicious reaction Obi-Wan gives after he says it.
I think it’s also why the visuals of the Klingon look in Discovery never bothered me. It always seemed like just another increase in budget and modern production design to the same fundamental design they’ve always had, the same way TNG improved upon TOS.
The 12 parsecs thing is emblematic of the entire original and prequel trilogies. George Lucas just made shit up as he went.
The problem with the 12 parsecs thing didn’t come from G-canon though. It was in extended universe, and later in the Solo movie, where the black holes explanation came in and removed the ability to interpret it as Han bullshitting.
I mean in the original trilogy when han said it. I assume George wrote it having no idea what the fuck a parsec is.
Oh yeah for sure. But this goes back to the other discussion I was having about Doylist vs Watsonian explanations. For this sort of issue, I strongly prefer to have a Watsonian explanation that we can use. And there is an official Watsonian explanation…it’s just a dumb and unsatisfying one compared to the one I prefered.
Well of course it was simply different production standards and budget, but it’s fun to come up with in-world rationalizations for these things.
Yeah no I get that, and normally I’m a big fan of finding Watsonian explanations for writing decisions rather than just accepting that something was done for production reasons or because of a studio note or some other Doylist reason. But for whatever reason when it comes specifically to visual changes I tend not to care as much.
A fun and well imagined notion for their “transformation.” Of course, as is the law of “Trek pedantry,” it was hypothesized in DS9 “Trials and Tribble-ations” by Dr. Bashir and confirmed in ENT to be the result of viral manipulation gone awry.
Per Memory Alpha:
I had forgotten what they came up with but yeah it was the virus thing. I still think a history-based explanation would have been a lot more interesting.
Plausible and relatively lore-friendly. As much as the writers usually draw from history, this is one of those areas where they strayed a tad.
I bet they only talk that way in the presence of outsiders. On their own, they must have a basic structured language while also utilizing
metaphorsmemes where appropriate.