Lingua Franca of the Universe?
Phil Fraering
>I think this sort of thing would make establishing a coherent
>interstellar culture very difficult.
>-- M. Ruff
ObSF, of course: _A Deepness In The Sky_.
--
Phil Fraering Now I lay me down to sleep
p...@globalreach.net Try to count electric sheep
/Will work for tape/ Sweet dream wishes you can keep
How I hate the night. - Marvin, the Paranoid Android.
BackTo1913
To conduct business or other activities, it is necessary to have a
lingua franca.
The problem is, the various aliens would have their own way of
communicating. One of the most important fallacies of SF authors is
that they assume the Aliens speak English, which is very unlikely.
They may communicate via electric pulses, telepathy, or something not
imagined by earthlings.
Or, just perhaps, there is a lingua franca of the Universe, spread by
the space version of Mongols and Tartars, but it has not yet conquered
the earth.
And, if there is really one lingua franca of the Universe, earthlings
would be better off by not having the chance to learn that. Why? Ask
Senor Hernan Cortez about that.
--
Three Principles of Life:
Don't fight a battle you will lose.
Do whatever that is most beneficial to you.
A loaf of bread is more valuable than freedom.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Jordan S. Bassior
>One of the most important fallacies of SF authors is
>that they assume the Aliens speak English
??? What SF authors assume that? Aliens could of course LEARN English or use
translation devices which had been programmed with English as one of their
languages, but that's another story entirely. I suspect that you are thinking
in terms of video SF ... and of course even there we don't know that characters
who seem to be talking "English" are in fact doing so ... it's a necessary
convention that the dialogue be in the language of the audience, even if the
audience is English-speaking and the characters are German, Russian, or
whatever.
>They may communicate via electric pulses, telepathy, or something not
>imagined by earthlings.
Plenty of that in science fiction. Telepathic aliens are a cliche ...
radio-pulsing aliens have been used in several stories (one of Poul Anderson's
excellent "Epilog").
>Or, just perhaps, there is a lingua franca of the Universe, spread by
>the space version of Mongols and Tartars, but it has not yet conquered
>the earth.
Very common SF assumption. In David Brin's Uplift stories, there are several
such languages, and English isn't one of them. In virtually every
interstellar-empire story where the imperials aren't English-speakers, the
"imperial tongue" has become the lingua franca.
>And, if there is really one lingua franca of the Universe, earthlings
>would be better off by not having the chance to learn that. Why? Ask
>Senor Hernan Cortez about that.
Maybe we'd be better off learning it on our terms. The Spanish were going to
bump into the Aztecs eventually ... if the Aztecs had gained the knowledge
BEFORE running into an organized Spanish military force, they might have
weathered the storm better than they did.
Sincerely Yours,
Jordan
"Man, as we know him, is a poor creature; but he is halfway between an ape and
a god and he is travelling in the right direction." (Dean William R. Inge)
Louann Miller
wrote:
>The problem is, the various aliens would have their own way of
>communicating. One of the most important fallacies of SF authors is
>that they assume the Aliens speak English, which is very unlikely.
His grasp of SF is every bit the equal of his grasp of history,
economics, psychology, and military tactics.
Jordan S. Bassior
>His grasp of SF is every bit the equal of his grasp of history,
>economics, psychology, and military tactics.
It seems to be based on watching (and misunderstanding) Star Trek and Doctor
Who. (In the former show the characters were explicitly using "universal
translators", and in the latter I believe it was eventually explained that the
TARDIS somehow performed this service).
James Nicoll
Jordan S. Bassior <jsba...@aol.com> wrote:
>Feudalist said:
>
>>One of the most important fallacies of SF authors is
>
>??? What SF authors assume that?
I was in an rpg campaign run by James Allan Gardner, elements
of which were incorporated into his SF novels, where all the aliens did
speak English. The PTB arranged for every inhabited planet to eventually
arrive at a language indistinguishable to the ear from English [Actually,
English sounds like their language since they spoke it first but you
know what I mean]. Made incorporating the worlds into the universal empire
easier. Think this got dropped in his SF novels.
The spelling varied from world to world though so the program wasn't
perfect.
An awful lot of his work before he broke into SF is reflected,
often very dimly, in his current SF. The sillier details got dropped,
like the gun which made one motionless wrt the centre of the universe
[an office in the Math and Computer building at UW, I think, MC30something]
or the plot to reduce the speed of light in a certain region to contain
an Azathothian-level menace: they couldn't stop it but C = 1 mm/century
sure slowed it down. Actaully the second wasn't silly but having Percy
Pulsar, Space Accountant blow the whole thing open because the slightly
increased relativistic effects were throwing his books off was.
James Nicoll
--
"You know, it's getting more and more like _Blade Runner_ down
here."
A customer commenting on downtown Kitchener
J. Moreno
> BackTo1913 <feud...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
> >The problem is, the various aliens would have their own way of
> >communicating. One of the most important fallacies of SF authors is
> >that they assume the Aliens speak English, which is very unlikely.
>
> His grasp of SF is every bit the equal of his grasp of history,
> economics, psychology, and military tactics.
I don't know -- this seems a bit more coherent and thought out than his
other ideas... <g>. I mean at least in most books I read most of the
words are in English...that's closer than he gets in other areas.
--
John Moreno
John Hughes
> I am sure it won't be English.
Well, no, it'll be French of course.
Is this guy dumb, or what?
--
John Hughes <jo...@Calva.COM>,
Atlantic Technologies Inc. Tel: +33-1-4313-3131
66 rue du Moulin de la Pointe, Fax: +33-1-4313-3139
75013 PARIS.
J. Moreno
> BackTo1913 <feud...@my-deja.com> writes:
>
> > I am sure it won't be English.
>
> Well, no, it'll be French of course.
>
> Is this guy dumb, or what?
This guy is dumb AND what...
--
John Moreno
Jim Gardner
> >In article <19990930115325...@ng-cr1.aol.com>,
> >Jordan S. Bassior <jsba...@aol.com> wrote:
> >>Feudalist said:
> >>
> >>>One of the most important fallacies of SF authors is
> >>>that they assume the Aliens speak English
> >>
> >>??? What SF authors assume that?
>
> > I was in an rpg campaign run by James Alan Gardner, elements
> >of which were incorporated into his SF novels, where all the aliens did
> >speak English. The PTB arranged for every inhabited planet to eventually
> >arrive at a language indistinguishable to the ear from English [Actually,
> >English sounds like their language since they spoke it first but you
> >know what I mean]. Made incorporating the worlds into the universal empire
> >easier. Think this got dropped in his SF novels.
Just to clarify...yes, of course I dropped that in my novels. I actuallypay a
fair amount of attention to the languages aliens speak; when they
*do* speak English, I always try to explain how they learned the
language if it's not immediately obvious. I also build up vocabularies
of the languages spoken by aliens, and even do some hand-waving
about cultural diversity among alien races; a single species may have
multiple languages, just like humans do.
By the way, when I wrote my first novel (Expendable), I tried
very hard not to give any name to the language that the humans
were speaking. I wanted to leave the possibility open that they might
be speaking Chinese/Spanish/whatever, and contemporary readers were
simply reading a translation of whatever language they actually used.
Unfortunately, I eventually got backed into a corner by plot
considerations and had to state explicitly they were speaking
English...but I didn't like doing it.
I still don't think of the characters as saying the words that I actually
put into their mouths. The books take place 400+ years into the future;
by then, I expect English will have changed as much as it has since
Elizabethan times. My characters will actually be speaking some
evolved version of English that we can't even guess at. However,
I wanted the books to give the impression of everyday people
speaking colloquially, so I decided to use more-or-less colloquial
20th century English, minus any slang that is too obviously mired in 1999.
(Besides, the jokes work better in colloquial English than they
would in some invented slang.)
James Alan Gardner
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Web page: http://www.thinkage.on.ca/~jim
Novels: EXPENDABLE, COMMITMENT HOUR, VIGILANT (all from Avon)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
P.S. I once wrote an (unpublished) story about French astronauts landing
on a planet where all the aliens spoke English. The astronauts say
something like, "Merde, this is the twentieth planet so far," and fly away
in disgust.
P.D. TILLMAN
In a previous article, loua...@yahoo.net (Louann Miller) says:
>On Thu, 30 Sep 1999 15:00:07 GMT, BackTo1913 <feud...@my-deja.com>
>wrote:
>
>>The problem is, the various aliens would have their own way of
>>communicating. One of the most important fallacies of SF authors is
>>that they assume the Aliens speak English, which is very unlikely.
>
>His grasp of SF is every bit the equal of his grasp of history,
>economics, psychology, and military tactics.
>
>
Yup.
Thick skull, thick skin.
Cheers - Pete Tillman
--
"It's a sin to waste the reader's time" -- Larry Niven
--
Pete McCutchen
wrote:
>Louann Miller said:
>
>>His grasp of SF is every bit the equal of his grasp of history,
>>economics, psychology, and military tactics.
>
>It seems to be based on watching (and misunderstanding) Star Trek and Doctor
>Who. (In the former show the characters were explicitly using "universal
>translators", and in the latter I believe it was eventually explained that the
>TARDIS somehow performed this service).
I thought that the Doctor said it was a "Time Lord Gift," which he
somehow made available to his companions. (Mysteriously, often
_before_ they were companions.)
Note that in the Sci-Fi show Farscape, they inserted nano-translators
into our hero's body in the premier episode.
Jordan S. Bassior
>I thought that the Doctor said it was a "Time Lord Gift," which he
>somehow made available to his companions. (Mysteriously, often
>_before_ they were companions.)
Oh ... ok. Sounds like some sort of nanotech translation talent, or maybe a
psychic field. Some sorta handwaving gobbledygook to explain why Our Heroes can
talk to ANYONE ... human, alien, or super-cyborg ... whom they encounter.
Nancy Lebovitz
>
>>I thought that the Doctor said it was a "Time Lord Gift," which he
>>somehow made available to his companions. (Mysteriously, often
>>_before_ they were companions.)
>
things in advance? (Maybe there is--it would depend on the theory
of time in the stories.)
--
Nancy Lebovitz na...@netaxs.com
Calligraphic button catalogue available by email!
Anton Sherwood
: I am sure it won't be English.
Are you sure it won't be largely descended from English? That is,
sure either that there is already interspecies trade going on Out
There, or that even if a human culture grows to dominate the Universe
it will not be derived from one in which English is dominant?
If most interstellar traders already speak Framistani, obviously humans
will have a motive to learn Framistani. But if humans are among the
founders of the first interstellar trading culture, a human language
has (a priori) as much chance as any other.
The other possibility is that English loses its dominance on Earth
before the human diaspora begins, either because the world economy
crashes or because some non-Anglo power acquires military dominance.
--
Anton Sherwood *\\* +1 415 267 0685 *\\* http://www.jps.net/antons/
Robert Shaw
Pete McCutchen wrote
> On 30 Sep 1999 17:30:43 GMT, jsba...@aol.com (Jordan S. Bassior)
> wrote:
>
> >It seems to be based on watching (and misunderstanding) Star Trek and
Doctor
> >Who. (In the former show the characters were explicitly using
"universal
> >translators", and in the latter I believe it was eventually explained
that the
> >TARDIS somehow performed this service).
>
> somehow made available to his companions. (Mysteriously, often
> _before_ they were companions.)
>
his enemies. Anyone who travelled by Tardis got to speak the local
language. How that worked was left very vague. The Tardis could
easily have 100,000 languages in its data banks, copied from the
time-lords files, but how did it put them in its passengers' heads?
--
'It is a wise crow that knows which way the camel points' - Pratchett
Robert Shaw
Nancy Lebovitz
new languages.
What do you think might happen to language if everyone is able to
learn languages as easily as the people now who are best at it?
c36...@sp2n21.missouri.edu
> BackTo1913 <feud...@my-deja.com> writes
> : I am sure it won't be English.
> Are you sure it won't be largely descended from English? That is,
> sure either that there is already interspecies trade going on Out
> There, or that even if a human culture grows to dominate the Universe
> it will not be derived from one in which English is dominant?
> If most interstellar traders already speak Framistani, obviously humans
> will have a motive to learn Framistani. But if humans are among the
> founders of the first interstellar trading culture, a human language
> has (a priori) as much chance as any other.
> The other possibility is that English loses its dominance on Earth
> before the human diaspora begins, either because the world economy
> crashes or because some non-Anglo power acquires military dominance.
Unless your aliens have a tongue, lips, palette, etc, most human
phonemes will be very hard to pronounce. Lester Del Rey had a
short story where the LF was whistle speech. Everyone could do it
either naturally or with the help of a simple voder. Hmmm . . .
maybe digital clicks, or even sign language.
Ike
J. Moreno
> jsba...@aol.com (Jordan S. Bassior) wrote:
>
> >Maybe we'd be better off learning it on our terms. The Spanish were going to
> >bump into the Aztecs eventually ... if the Aztecs had gained the knowledge
> >BEFORE running into an organized Spanish military force, they might have
> >weathered the storm better than they did.
>
> However, learning Spanish wouldn't have conferred immunity to smallpox
> et al. Losing the major fraction of your population to disease makes
> weathering any storm much tougher.
I think you guys are missing his point -- it's not about languages or
diseases, he thinks the Aztecs got wiped out because they ran into a
more advanced civilization, and as usual he is wrong.
You mention smallpox, and that was certainly a big factor, but probably
not as big as the fact they'd been lording it over their neighbors and
had an insane leader, and a culture which encouraged both.
The Aztecs were about ripe for a change from within, the Spanish took
advantage of that, but it could have easily gone a dozen different ways.
Any argument that the Spanish won because they were from a more advanced
civilization, is severely flawed.
> Mike
> (NOTE: there's no 'X' in my real email address)
Then the address you are posting with should end in the top level
domain, ".invalid", maybe something like <mj...@netdoor.com.invalid>?
--
John Moreno
Dimitris Tsallas
(Anton Sherwood) took the opportunity to write:
>BackTo1913 <feud...@my-deja.com> writes
>: I am sure it won't be English.
>
>Are you sure it won't be largely descended from English? That is,
>sure either that there is already interspecies trade going on Out
>There, or that even if a human culture grows to dominate the Universe
>it will not be derived from one in which English is dominant?
>
>If most interstellar traders already speak Framistani, obviously humans
>will have a motive to learn Framistani. But if humans are among the
>founders of the first interstellar trading culture, a human language
>has (a priori) as much chance as any other.
Unless a vast majority of the species we encounter lacks the physiology
that would permit them to speak English. Taking this argument the other way
round, it's quite possible that earthlings will be incapable of speaking
Framistani. Personally I believe universal translators will be the Lingua
Franca of the universe. That is we will have a group of languages, with
each one being the "universal" language for a group of species with similar
construction of voice chords (or voice mechanism in general). As a result
of that universal translators will be a necessary gadget for interuniversal
(is there such a word?) communication.
Dimitris Tsallas
(Replace .wrong with .gr to reply)
http://www.scifi.gr
Jorj Strumolo
NL> What do you think might happen to language if everyone is able to
> learn languages as easily as the people now who are best at it?
Goulash? If you know ten languages, you might use words from
all of them in the same paragraph, choosing words that had the
exact shade of meaning you were after, instead of simply the
closest analog in a particular tongue. You might use a similar
stew of grammatical rules, concatenating words, using various
tenses and constructions, etc, without regard to the particular
vocabulary. You'd probably create neologisms galore, secure in
the knowledge that your compatriots would be able to understand
them instantly. You might end up with one stupendously complex
and versatile omni-tongue, better than the sum of its parts.
gromgorru
Robert Shaw wrote in message <7t494c$2u5$1...@news7.svr.pol.co.uk>...
>
>>
>The Doctor doesn't always tell the truth, he keeps some secrets from
>his enemies. Anyone who travelled by Tardis got to speak the local
>language. How that worked was left very vague. The Tardis could
>easily have 100,000 languages in its data banks, copied from the
>time-lords files, but how did it put them in its passengers' heads?
Dr Who is friends with Orfindel?
Nancy Lebovitz
that are kept relatively "pure" for particular uses or in-groups.
J. Moreno
> J. Moreno said:
>
> >I think you guys are missing his point -- it's not about languages or
> >diseases, he thinks the Aztecs got wiped out because they ran into a
> >more advanced civilization, and as usual he is wrong.
>
> Are you arguing that the Spanish civilization was NOT more advanced than
> the Mexican, or that the ways in which it was more advanced were not
> important or essential to enabling the Spanish conquest?
The latter.
> >You mention smallpox, and that was certainly a big factor, but probably
> >not as big as the fact they'd been lording it over their neighbors and
> >had an insane leader, and a culture which encouraged both.
>
> The crucial element in Aztec culture which prevented the Aztecs from
> forming a stable and unified imperial system was that their religion
> required mass human sacrifice. This meant that Tenochtitlan was in the
> position of a predator with its subject cities as its prey herds, rather
> than a metropole with provinces.
>
> Mass human sacrifice had been an element of the civilizations ancestral to
> the Spanish, but the Mesopotamians and Egyptians gave up on this practice
> around 4000 years before the Spanish contacted the Aztecs. Again, the lead
> the Spanish had over the Aztecs proved crucial here.
True, but it hardly requires mass human sacrifice to treat the provinces
as something to leech of off and that they aren't the equals of the
people at home. Otherwise we wouldn't have had the American Revolution.
> >The Aztecs were about ripe for a change from within, the Spanish took
> >advantage of that,
>
> Jared Diamond, in _Guns Germs and Steel_, also argues that one of the
> immense advantages the Spanish had over the Aztecs was that the Spanish
> leaders had access to over 2000 years of stored wisdom in the form of
> knowledge of history (and up to 3000 years if you add Biblical history),
> including the history of diplomatic and political intrigue. By contrast,
> Mesoamerican history stretched back only 500 - 1000 years.
I don't think that's very significant, you hardly have to go back 2000
years to get an example of anything important, especially militarily,
> For example, the Spanish never would have fallen for the "god game" Cortez
> pulled on Moctezuma II. They had too many examples of such ... and
> defenses in the form of the Inquisition and the concept of "heresy" ... to
> be so gullible.
That a form the culture took, not necessarily more "advanced" except in
the sense that it's more sturdy.
> >but it could have easily gone a dozen different ways.
>
> Yet Pizarro was to duplicate Cortez's feat, 20 years later. And other
> conquistadores were to run roughshod over whole native tribes with armies
> numbering at the most in the hundreds, sometimes only tens of Spanish
> soldiers. When the same feat is duplicated and reduplicated, something
> other than sheer random chance is going on ... the side doing the
> conquering clearly has some sort of edge over their victims.
Sure, but just what the "edge" is, isn't so clear cut -- I bet you can
beat most of the people in the critical care unit of any hospital at arm
wrestling, this doesn't mean that you're stronger than the average bear.
> >Any argument that the Spanish won because they were from a more advanced
> >civilization, is severely flawed.
>
> Metallurgy. Gunpowder. Dometicated horses. Mastiffs. Formation fighting
> tactics. Sailing ships ...
Metallurgy and gunpowder weren't actually that useful, at least not as
tools, better tools were great trade items. Hard to domesticate horses
when they aren't any around.
None of this would have made any difference if they'd arrived earlier,
while the Aztecs were the ones knocking off nations right and left.
> Would you count those as the products of "a more advanced civilization?"
> If so, then coming from "a more advanced civilization" gave the Spanish
> the edge over the Indians, time after time and in one campaign after
> another.
Those are products of a more advanced civilization, but weren't the
factors that made it possible. IIRC, the problem with the Aztecs is
actually just the opposite -- they were decadent, falling apart from
internal strife. The Spanish on the other hand were the young turks,
coming and taking over, because they were younger and more vigorous.
The fact that they came from a culture with more advanced technology,
just greased them along their way.
--
John Moreno
Jordan S. Bassior
>What do you think might happen to language if everyone is able to
>learn languages as easily as the people now who are best at it?
I think you'd get some incredibly complex, rich languages with layer upon layer
of metaphor and cross-reference. Languages as far beyond anything Man's ever
created as what we use now is beyond chimpanzee vocalizations and gestures.
Jordan S. Bassior
>However, learning Spanish wouldn't have conferred immunity to smallpox
>et al. Losing the major fraction of your population to disease makes
>weathering any storm much tougher.
Yes. But that was going to happen regardless of what the Aztecs learned.
Jordan S. Bassior
>I think you guys are missing his point -- it's not about languages or
>diseases, he thinks the Aztecs got wiped out because they ran into a
>more advanced civilization, and as usual he is wrong.
Are you arguing that the Spanish civilization was NOT more advanced than the
Mexican, or that the ways in which it was more advanced were not important or
essential to enabling the Spanish conquest?
>You mention smallpox, and that was certainly a big factor, but probably
>not as big as the fact they'd been lording it over their neighbors and
>had an insane leader, and a culture which encouraged both.
The crucial element in Aztec culture which prevented the Aztecs from forming a
stable and unified imperial system was that their religion required mass human
sacrifice. This meant that Tenochtitlan was in the position of a predator with
its subject cities as its prey herds, rather than a metropole with provinces.
Mass human sacrifice had been an element of the civilizations ancestral to the
Spanish, but the Mesopotamians and Egyptians gave up on this practice around
4000 years before the Spanish contacted the Aztecs. Again, the lead the Spanish
had over the Aztecs proved crucial here.
>The Aztecs were about ripe for a change from within, the Spanish took
>advantage of that,
Jared Diamond, in _Guns Germs and Steel_, also argues that one of the immense
advantages the Spanish had over the Aztecs was that the Spanish leaders had
access to over 2000 years of stored wisdom in the form of knowledge of history
(and up to 3000 years if you add Biblical history), including the history of
diplomatic and political intrigue. By contrast, Mesoamerican history stretched
back only 500 - 1000 years.
For example, the Spanish never would have fallen for the "god game" Cortez
pulled on Moctezuma II. They had too many examples of such ... and defenses in
the form of the Inquisition and the concept of "heresy" ... to be so gullible.
>but it could have easily gone a dozen different ways.
Yet Pizarro was to duplicate Cortez's feat, 20 years later. And other
conquistadores were to run roughshod over whole native tribes with armies
numbering at the most in the hundreds, sometimes only tens of Spanish soldiers.
When the same feat is duplicated and reduplicated, something other than sheer
random chance is going on ... the side doing the conquering clearly has some
sort of edge over their victims.
>Any argument that the Spanish won because they were from a more advanced
>civilization, is severely flawed.
Metallurgy. Gunpowder. Dometicated horses. Mastiffs. Formation fighting
tactics. Sailing ships ...
Would you count those as the products of "a more advanced civilization?" If so,
then coming from "a more advanced civilization" gave the Spanish the edge over
the Indians, time after time and in one campaign after another.
Sincerely Yours,
William Clifford
wrote:
>Mike Stewart <mj...@netdoor.com> wrote:
>> However, learning Spanish wouldn't have conferred immunity to smallpox
>> et al. Losing the major fraction of your population to disease makes
>> weathering any storm much tougher.
>
>I think you guys are missing his point -- it's not about languages or
>diseases, he thinks the Aztecs got wiped out because they ran into a
>more advanced civilization, and as usual he is wrong.
Actually the point is to get you guys riled up about stuff that is
only peripherally on topic for this group.
--
|William Clifford |"Dear Theo, |
|wo...@yahoo.com | I've been trying to paint the wheat- |
|lame webpage at: | feild but there's all these damned |
|http://www.ionline.com/wobh | crows in my way. I need a gun..." |
Jordan S. Bassior
>True, but it hardly requires mass human sacrifice to treat the provinces
>as something to leech of off and that they aren't the equals of the
>people at home. Otherwise we wouldn't have had the American Revolution.
But the Aztec imperial system was especially obnoxious, because it required (1)
the maintenance of the noble and warrior classes in its provinces, coupled with
(2) ritual warfare against followed by ritual sacrifice of members of these
classes among its subject cities.
Thus, the Aztecs were keeping intact the very classes likely to lead a
successful overthrow of their system, AND giving them a good reason to want to
overthrow the system. With NO possibility of the subjects EVER being able to
avoid the threat of death through compliance with the overlords.
This has to have been one of the most self-destructive imperial systems the
world has ever seen. It's possible that some of the early Egyptian kingdoms or
Sumerian city-states worked like this (we have evidence of mass human sacrifice
from Pre-Dynastic Egypt and First Dynasty Ur) but evolved away from the
practice, because it was ineffective as a means of maintaining a long-lasting
empire.
>I don't think that's very significant, you hardly have to go back 2000
>years to get an example of anything important, especially militarily,
It's interesting that you should say that, because one of the fruits of the
Renaissance was the explicit resurrection of parts of the Roman and Greek
military systems, which at the time had been dead 1000-2000 years. Some of the
strategies and tactics Cortez used against the Aztecs had been cribbed directly
or indirectly from the Ancient World. In particular, the tercio was derived
from the Roman cohort, and the Renaissance halberd and pike square (which
became the Baroque musket and pike square) from the Greek phalanx.
>> For example, the Spanish never would have fallen for the "god game" Cortez
>> pulled on Moctezuma II. They had too many examples of such ... and
>> defenses in the form of the Inquisition and the concept of "heresy" ... to
>> be so gullible.
>
>That a form the culture took, not necessarily more "advanced" except in
>the sense that it's more sturdy.
It was based upon the development of Aristotlean logic and its application to
religious belief-systems (the scholasticism of the Middle Ages). Another
application of the same philosophical discoveries led to the
reverse-engineering of gunpowder and the development of reliable cannon and
arquebuses (another advantage the Spanish had over the American Indians). (*)
Still another led to the selective breeding of animals (resulting in the great
warhorses and mastiffs the Indians so feared).
>Sure, but just what the "edge" is, isn't so clear cut -- I bet you can
>beat most of the people in the critical care unit of any hospital at arm
>wrestling, this doesn't mean that you're stronger than the average bear.
Disease helped the Spanish greatly, but not all of the Indians they faced were
mortally ill. (Indeed, most of those actively on the battlefield were those who
were relatively resistant to the diseases, for the obvious reason that those
who weren't were dead or dying).
The superior Spanish immunity to disease was a side-effect of the longer and
broader history of civilization in the Old World, as compared to the New.
Epidemic diseases probably began in the Old World around 4000 - 3000 BCE, when
large-scale urbanization began in Mesopotamia and along the Nile. By the time
of Cortez, that was around 5000 years ... half a myriad, or almost 200
generations ... a fair amount of time even on the scale of biological
evolution. By contrast, Mesoamerica had only had quasi-cities (the Mayan ritual
centers) for about 2000 years, and true cities for about 1000 years, by the
time the Spanish came.
Furthermore, Old World history was broader. The Mediterranean had been a
sporadically linked area since around 1500 BCE (3000 years) and regularly
linked by trade since around 500 BCE (2000 years). There were also semi-regular
trade ties to the East Indies and to China. This was a vast civilized world
compared to the tiny Valley of Mexico and the outlying Mayan and Mississippi
regions. (The Andean world as far as we know had little or no contact with
Mexico or the Maya).
>Metallurgy and gunpowder weren't actually that useful, at least not as tools
???!!!
(1) Metal tools were tremendously more useful than stone ones, for the simple
reason that a broken or dulled stone tool must be discarded, while a broken
metal tool may be reforged, and a dulled one need merely be sharpened. It's
true that metal tools were used at first only by the middle and upper classes,
but this included a lot of extremely critical types of production.
(2) Gunpowder was useful for engineering as well as military purposes.
(3) In the context of the Conquest, a lot of the "tools" which were relevant
were WEAPONS. Steel swords had a tremendous advantage over wooden clubs, even
when given an edge by quartz teeth, and steel helmets and cuirasses were proof
against native weapons. The fact that the Spanish also adopted the quilted
cotton armor worn by the natives (to replace the leather and cloth they would
have bought in Europe) doesn't change these facts. Gunpowder weapons, while not
available to the Spanish in all their battles, were frequently decisive when
employed (especially by Pizarro).
>Hard to domesticate horses when they aren't any around.
True. So what? I never claimed that the Spanish owed their superior advancement
to their personal moral qualities ... they were lucky to come from an older and
larger civilized world than the Mesoamerican one.
>None of this would have made any difference if they'd arrived earlier,
>while the Aztecs were the ones knocking off nations right and left.
That's an interesting WI ... I suspect that in that situation Cortez would have
allied with the threatened nations, worked his way into the leadership of the
coalition, and events would have eventually worked out similarly to in OTL.
Though perhaps the ultimate Spanish ascendancy would have been less total, and
less cruelly arrived at.
Remember, Cortez did not beat the Aztecs single-handed. He led a revolt of the
Aztec subject nations, which in the course of time so exhausted Mexico that the
Spanish wound up in charge.
>IIRC, the problem with the Aztecs is
>actually just the opposite -- they were decadent, falling apart from
>internal strife
Their imperial system inherently encouraged internal strife.
>The Spanish on the other hand were the young turks,
>coming and taking over, because they were younger and more vigorous.
And yet in less than a century they too were to lose their dominance to the
English and French.
>The fact that they came from a culture with more advanced technology,
>just greased them along their way.
Had Cortez led a few hundred Neolithic warriors, rather than Gunpowder Age
soldiers, for all his skill he would have been merely a footnote to the history
of the Fall of the Aztec Empire (which might have occurred rather later).
(*) For that matter, the Hellenistic Revolution had also produced the whole
CONCEPT of "artillery", in the form of mechanical torsion engines, which were
developed quite deliberately and in a manner similar to modern R & D efforts by
various Greek tyrants of the 4th and 3rd centuries BCE. "Eureka", indeed :)
Matt Ruff / Lisa Gold
>
> Or, just perhaps, there is a lingua franca of the Universe, spread by
> the space version of Mongols and Tartars, but it has not yet conquered
> the earth.
Leaving aside differences in biology, wouldn't light speed limitations
plus the constant evolution of language prevent any single tongue from
dominating the universe, or even a small portion of it?
-- M. Ruff
Matt Ruff / Lisa Gold
>
> If most interstellar traders already speak Framistani, obviously
> humans will have a motive to learn Framistani. But if humans are
> among the founders of the first interstellar trading culture, a
> human language has (a priori) as much chance as any other.
>
> before the human diaspora begins, either because the world economy
> crashes or because some non-Anglo power acquires military dominance.
The third possibility is that English is the dominant language on Earth
when the interstellar tradeship sets out, but by the time it gets back
two hundred years (local frame of reference) have passed and everyone is
speaking Swahili.
I think this sort of thing would make establishing a coherent
interstellar culture very difficult.
-- M. Ruff
Nancy Lebovitz
>>beat most of the people in the critical care unit of any hospital at arm
>>wrestling, this doesn't mean that you're stronger than the average bear.
>
>Disease helped the Spanish greatly, but not all of the Indians they faced were
>mortally ill. (Indeed, most of those actively on the battlefield were those who
>were relatively resistant to the diseases, for the obvious reason that those
>who weren't were dead or dying).
>
if the population has dropped a lot, then there are fewer soldiers
and fewer people doing support.
Jordan S. Bassior
>Leaving aside differences in biology, wouldn't light speed limitations
>plus the constant evolution of language prevent any single tongue from
>dominating the universe, or even a small portion of it?
Immortality would tend to slow the evolution of tongues. And I'm not sure if
lightspeed is an ultimate communications speed limit, in the context of a
sufficiently advanced society with lots and lots of energy to burn doing things
like constructing artificial wormholes.
Jordan S. Bassior
>The third possibility is that English is the dominant language on Earth
>when the interstellar tradeship sets out, but by the time it gets back
>two hundred years (local frame of reference) have passed and everyone is
>speaking Swahili.
Since if we assume lightspeed limits we must also assume very long journeys in
very large ships, I think the traders would have time to learn whatever
language was becoming popular at their destination. Remember, too, that they
can receive continuous radio transmissions from all worlds within range of
their receivers.
Jordan S. Bassior
>I doubt that the point is that the Aztecs on the battlefield were ill--
>if the population has dropped a lot, then there are fewer soldiers
>and fewer people doing support.
Oh yes ... but the Aztecs still outnumbered the Spaniards and their allies, in
the early battles. And the last great battle, Tenochtitlan, was very
hard-fought. (There's a good game on the topic, _Cortez_, from XTR).
Pete McCutchen
wrote:
>>Pete McCutchen said:
>>
>>>I thought that the Doctor said it was a "Time Lord Gift," which he
>>>somehow made available to his companions. (Mysteriously, often
>>>_before_ they were companions.)
>>
>Is there anything mysterious about a Time Lord being able to do
>things in advance? (Maybe there is--it would depend on the theory
>of time in the stories.)
There was no indication that he knew, in advance, that a particular
person would become a companion. For that matter, in at least one
case (Turlow), he would have taken precautions had he known the true
nature of the companion, and in another case (Teegan), he probably
should have tried to prevent the chain of events that led to her
becoming a companion, since it involved the murder of her aunt by the
Doctor's arch-enemy.
J. Moreno
> J. Moreno said:
>
> >True, but it hardly requires mass human sacrifice to treat the provinces
> >as something to leech of off and that they aren't the equals of the
> >people at home. Otherwise we wouldn't have had the American Revolution.
>
> But the Aztec imperial system was especially obnoxious, because it
> required (1) the maintenance of the noble and warrior classes in its
> provinces, coupled with (2) ritual warfare against followed by ritual
> sacrifice of members of these classes among its subject cities.
-snip-
> This has to have been one of the most self-destructive imperial systems
> the world has ever seen. It's possible that some of the early Egyptian
> kingdoms or Sumerian city-states worked like this (we have evidence of
> mass human sacrifice from Pre-Dynastic Egypt and First Dynasty Ur) but
> evolved away from the practice, because it was ineffective as a means of
> maintaining a long-lasting empire.
Well, the Aztecs lasted for a goodly period of time, but you're right
that the seeds of it's fall were part of the culture from the beginning.
But that just goes to prove my point -- it wasn't that spanish were an
older or wiser culture, or more technologically advanced, rather the
aztecs' culture bread dissent.
-snip-
> >None of this would have made any difference if they'd arrived earlier,
> >while the Aztecs were the ones knocking off nations right and left.
>
> That's an interesting WI ... I suspect that in that situation Cortez would
> have allied with the threatened nations, worked his way into the
> leadership of the coalition, and events would have eventually worked out
> similarly to in OTL. Though perhaps the ultimate Spanish ascendancy would
> have been less total, and less cruelly arrived at.
There's a big difference between aiding a rebellion and stopping an
invasion -- I think he'd have allied with the Aztecs and been more
trader than conqueror.
> Remember, Cortez did not beat the Aztecs single-handed. He led a revolt of
> the Aztec subject nations, which in the course of time so exhausted Mexico
> that the Spanish wound up in charge.
Of course he didn't do it singlehandedly, but I think that leading a
revolt is rather easier than leading the defense of an invasion. For
one thing the leaders would be rather less willing to have outsiders in
charge.
> >The fact that they came from a culture with more advanced technology,
> >just greased them along their way.
>
> Had Cortez led a few hundred Neolithic warriors, rather than Gunpowder Age
> soldiers, for all his skill he would have been merely a footnote to the
> history of the Fall of the Aztec Empire (which might have occurred rather
> later).
Although it might have been latter, it still would have happened (and I
wouldn't be so sure about him having been just a footnote either, he
could have still ended up as one of the leaders, it just wouldn't have
been so complete).
--
John Moreno
Robert Shaw
a translator, before they had ever met him. It depends how mutable
history is in his universe, but the Doctor is a Time Lord, he doesn't
play by the normal rules.
However Teegan nor Turlough needed any translation while they were
still on earth. They both left the planet by Tardis, and it might give
all passengers the gift, including stowaways.
What's more surprising is that all the alien invaders spoke English,
and some of them had no chance to learn it in advance. If the
Doctor extended his gift to every passing alien, that was generous
indeed.
James Nicoll
Matt Ruff / Lisa Gold <Storyt...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>The third possibility is that English is the dominant language on Earth
>when the interstellar tradeship sets out, but by the time it gets back
>two hundred years (local frame of reference) have passed and everyone is
>speaking Swahili.
>
>I think this sort of thing would make establishing a coherent
>interstellar culture very difficult.
That's what the Star Guard is for: it zips about monitoring
deloping cultures in the Human Realm and when they divert too much
[using superfluous 'u' spellings, for example], they zap them with
R-bombs and resettle.
ObSF: _Dark Sky Legion_
James Nicoll
--
"You know, it's getting more and more like _Blade Runner_ down
here."
A customer commenting on downtown Kitchener
Anton Sherwood
conventions (e.g. OVS with VSO) in one sentence. I'd expect the
word-order to be flagged by the choice of particles and auxiliaries.
na...@unix3.netaxs.com (Nancy Lebovitz) writes:
: > What do you think might happen to language if everyone is able to
: > learn languages as easily as the people now who are best at it?
Jorj Strumolo <jo...@fastdial.net> writes
: Goulash? If you know ten languages, you might use words from
: all of them in the same paragraph, choosing words that had the
: exact shade of meaning you were after, instead of simply the
: closest analog in a particular tongue. You might use a similar
: stew of grammatical rules, concatenating words, using various
: tenses and constructions, etc, without regard to the particular
: vocabulary. You'd probably create neologisms galore, secure in
: the knowledge that your compatriots would be able to understand
: them instantly. You might end up with one stupendously complex
: and versatile omni-tongue, better than the sum of its parts.
--
Anton Sherwood
: Unless your aliens have a tongue, lips, palette, etc, most human
: phonemes will be very hard to pronounce. Lester Del Rey had a
: short story where the LF was whistle speech. Everyone could do it
: either naturally or with the help of a simple voder. Hmmm . . .
: maybe digital clicks, or even sign language.
What's the maximum information rate of human whistling, i.e. the number
of different whistles we can make and distinguish in a given time?
I can't believe it's anywhere near that of speech.
At least once (A Circus of Hells) I've seen devices that substitute
the phonemes one kind of mouth can make for the smallest units of
another people's speech-equivalent. The interlanguage used with
such a device would be defined as strings of abstract symbols, but
with constraints that increase redundancy: in the human form they
must cluster into syllables, for example.
(Is there an expert on Georgian in the house, to tell me syllables
are not necessary?)
Anton Sherwood
: Since if we assume lightspeed limits we must also assume very long journeys
: in very large ships, I think the traders would have time to learn whatever
: language was becoming popular at their destination. Remember, too, that they
: can receive continuous radio transmissions from all worlds within range of
: their receivers.
Hm - if the ship is at one gee all the way (unlikely at first, but who
knows?), might it be difficult near turnover to keep matched to the
frequency?
Jordan S. Bassior
>Hm - if the ship is at one gee all the way (unlikely at first, but who
>knows?), might it be difficult near turnover to keep matched to the
>frequency?
If the ship's computer knows the ship's speed, tuning would be a fairly trivial
problem.
cd skogsberg
>BackTo1913 <feud...@my-deja.com> writes:
>> I am sure it won't be English.
>Well, no, it'll be French of course.
IIRC in a discussion here a while back someone mentioned Finnish (cue
H*inl*in and _Citizen Of The Galaxy_), as it is a very rules-rich
language, without the masses of exceptions that proliferate in so many
other tounges.
So, in conclusion, I have to say: Sinulla on hienot saniaset. Ei
jääkaapissanikan.
/cd
--
"Email sent throught Hotmail differs from most others emails because
it is routed through the internet."
- Victor Keegan, in "G2", The Manchester Guardian, 1 September 1999,
explaining the security flaws in Microsoft's Hotmail service.
David Mitchell
Moreno <pl...@newsreaders.com> writes
<snip>
>But that just goes to prove my point -- it wasn't that spanish were an
>older or wiser culture, or more technologically advanced, rather the
>aztecs' culture bread dissent.
>
You mean brown vs white, or just the wholemeal thing? ;-)
--
==========================================================================
David Mitchell ===== A life spent making mistakes is not only
================================ more honourable but more useful than a
da...@edenroad.demon.co.uk ===== life spent doing nothing. - GBS
==========================================================================
Jordan S. Bassior
>You mean brown vs white, or just the wholemeal thing? ;-)
Tacos. ORIGINAL recipe Tacos, heh heh heh ...
Justin Bacon
p.mcc...@worldnet.att.net (Pete McCutchen) writes:
>I thought that the Doctor said it was a "Time Lord Gift," which he
>somehow made available to his companions. (Mysteriously, often
>_before_ they were companions.)
Wait, he's a Time Lord and it's "mysterious" to you how that happened? :)
Justin Bacon
tr...@prairie.lakes.com
William December Starr
mat...@calmeilles.demon.co.uk said:
> Isn't there one story where The Doctor realises that the companion of
> the season (Sarah Jane? Journalist good for nothing but screaming)
<*cough*><*cough*>reallyniceass<*cough*>
> has been influenced by Something Very Nasty(tm) because she finally
> gets round to asking "how come everyone speaks English"?
-- William December Starr <wds...@crl.com>
Matthew Malthouse
Isn't there one story where The Doctor realises that the companion of
the season (Sarah Jane? Journalist good for nothing but screaming)
has been influenced by Something Very Nasty(tm) because she finally
gets round to asking "how come everyone speaks English"?
So who asked the question? (Not being a Time Lord I cannot persuade
this sever to deliver up expired articles) And what possessed you...
Matthew
--
"Nice boy, but about as sharp as a sack of wet mice."
-- Foghorn Leghorn
http://www.calmeilles.demon.co.uk
Matthew Malthouse
Matt Ruff / Lisa Gold
>
> I doubt that the point is that the Aztecs on the battlefield were
> soldiers and fewer people doing support.
According to one account I've read, between the time the Aztecs first
routed Cortes from Tenochtitlan and the time he came back with fresh
soldiers for a rematch, over half the population of the city had dropped
dead of smallpox. Included among the dead were many of the leaders who'd
organized the first defense of the city -- which left the survivors
badly demoralized and disordered.
-- M. Ruff
J. Moreno
Which was probably re-inforced the myth/legend/rumors, that he was a god
or something -- after all, when the people that oppose him start
dropping dead of a completely unknown disease...
--
John Moreno
mstemper - psc . com
> I am sure it won't be English.
How about Esperanto, as proposed by Harry Harrison? (_The Stainless
Steel Rat_)
>To conduct business or other activities, it is necessary to have a
>lingua franca.
Such as that specifically referred to by Smith as "the lingua franca
of that region of space"? (_Children of the Lens_) Matter of fact,
the multiplicity of languages was the (orignally perceived) reason
that the Solarian Patrol was overjoyed to get the lenses from fnord.
Such as Galactic Two or GalSix? (_Uplift_)
How about the many, many languages used for different purposes that
Herbert postulated? (_Dune Messiah_)
>The problem is, the various aliens would have their own way of
>communicating. One of the most important fallacies of SF authors is
>that they assume the Aliens speak English, which is very unlikely.
No, they assume their _readers_ speak English, which is very likely.
Did I mention "Omnilingual" yet?
>They may communicate via electric pulses, telepathy, or something not
>imagined by earthlings.
OTOH, I'm sure that you can imagine them.
>Or, just perhaps, there is a lingua franca of the Universe, spread by
>the space version of Mongols and Tartars, but it has not yet conquered
>the earth.
Languages don't generally conquer Earth, or anything else. Oh, maybe
they do: would Newspeak (_1984_) count as having conquered part of
Earth? Maybe _Babel-17_ could conquer Earth?
>And, if there is really one lingua franca of the Universe, earthlings
>would be better off by not having the chance to learn that.
That's right, we'd be better off being ignorant and unable to participate
in Galactic society. We'll just listen to the Rothen, our patrons, like
nice little feudalistic chattel.
> Ask Senor Hernan Cortez about that.
No puedo.
>Three Principles of Life:
TANSTAAFL
Always declare your variables
F = ma
--
Michael F. Stemper
mstemper @ siemens - psc . com
#include <Standard_Disclaimer>
I promise not to feed the troll again.
Jordan S. Bassior
>According to one account I've read, between the time the Aztecs first
>routed Cortes from Tenochtitlan and the time he came back with fresh
>soldiers for a rematch, over half the population of the city had dropped
>dead of smallpox. Included among the dead were many of the leaders who'd
>organized the first defense of the city -- which left the survivors
>badly demoralized and disordered.
Yes. Of course, the attack still wouldn't have worked if Cortez hadn't
organized a huge coalition of the other Mexican nations against the Aztecs.
Justin Bacon
<Storyt...@worldnet.att.net> writes:
>According to one account I've read, between the time the Aztecs first
>routed Cortes from Tenochtitlan and the time he came back with fresh
>soldiers for a rematch, over half the population of the city had dropped
>dead of smallpox.
Current estimates run somewhere between 80-90%. The population was completely
devastated.
Justin Bacon
tr...@prairie.lakes.com
Michael Caldwell
<19991001202650...@ng-ft1.aol.com>...
>Pete McCutchen said:
>>I thought that the Doctor said it was a "Time Lord Gift," which he
>>somehow made available to his companions. (Mysteriously, often
>>_before_ they were companions.)
>Oh ... ok. Sounds like some sort of nanotech translation talent, or maybe a
>psychic field. Some sorta handwaving gobbledygook to explain why Our Heroes
can
>talk to ANYONE ... human, alien, or super-cyborg ... whom they encounter.
It was probly just a babel-fish
Danny Sichel
>>Or, just perhaps, there is a lingua franca of the Universe, spread by
>>the space version of Mongols and Tartars, but it has not yet conquered
>>the earth.
> Languages don't generally conquer Earth, or anything else. Oh, maybe
> they do: would Newspeak (_1984_) count as having conquered part of
> Earth? Maybe _Babel-17_ could conquer Earth?
I read a story just last month about a cheesy pop song that conquered
the Earth.
Sort of.
"So Happy To Be Happy" was a meme life-form, and in order to get the
requisite brain-power to ponder some higher-dimensional math problem, it
spread to > 95% of the Earth's population.
("So, 'Happy', what next? Going to rule the world? Keep us all as your
pets?"
"Well... uh... no. You aren't THAT interesting.")
Brett Paul Dunbar
Malthouse <use...@calmeilles.demon.co.uk> writes
>On 04 Oct 1999 22:39:30 GMT Justin Bacon wrote:
>} In article <37f4f78b...@netnews.worldnet.att.net>,
>} p.mcc...@worldnet.att.net (Pete McCutchen) writes:
>}
>} >somehow made available to his companions. (Mysteriously, often
>} >_before_ they were companions.)
>}
>
>Isn't there one story where The Doctor realises that the companion of
>the season (Sarah Jane? Journalist good for nothing but screaming)
It was Sarah Jane Smith (a journalist) (she was one of the more
effective companions (e.g. in the first story in which she appears, she
organised, and led, a raid on Irongron's castle to kidnap the Doctor)).
--
Great Internet Mersenne Prime Search http://www.mersenne.org/prime.htm
Brett Dunbar
William December Starr
Brett Paul Dunbar <br...@dimetrodon.demon.co.uk> said:
>> Isn't there one story where The Doctor realises that the companion
>> of the season (Sarah Jane? Journalist good for nothing but
>> screaming) [Malthouse]
>
> It was Sarah Jane Smith (a journalist) (she was one of the more
> effective companions (e.g. in the first story in which she appears,
> she organised, and led, a raid on Irongron's castle to kidnap the
> Doctor)).
Of course, it's something like Received Wisdom among Doctor Who fans
that she became less and less effective over time. Me, I have to reserve
judgment since I haven't seen that many of her stories with Jon Pertwee.
Sarah Jane was my first Companion (and Tom Baker my first Doctor), so
I'll always have a soft spot in my head for her...
Susan Stepney
>
> In article <slrn7vikt0...@special.guardian.co.uk>, Matthew
> Malthouse <use...@calmeilles.demon.co.uk> writes
> >
> >the season (Sarah Jane? Journalist good for nothing but screaming)
>
> effective companions (e.g. in the first story in which she appears, she
> organised, and led, a raid on Irongron's castle to kidnap the Doctor)).
It's very strange, but I have this very strong memory that Sarah Jane
was "good for nothing but screaming", from watching the series
originally. But recently I've be rewatching on video -- and she's not
that bad, actually. So, since I have *certainly* not got *less*
critical of this aspect of Comapnions -- what gives??
--
_____________________________________________________________________
Susan Stepney tel +44 1223 366343 step...@logica.com
Logica UK Ltd, Betjeman House, 104 Hills Road, Cambridge, CB2 1LQ, UK
http://public.logica.com/~stepneys/ http://www.logica.com/
Lawrence Watt-Evans
<step...@logica.com> wrote:
>It's very strange, but I have this very strong memory that Sarah Jane
>was "good for nothing but screaming", from watching the series
>originally. But recently I've be rewatching on video -- and she's not
>that bad, actually. So, since I have *certainly* not got *less*
>critical of this aspect of Comapnions -- what gives??
I don't know, because certainly I never thought she was "good for
nothing but screaming." She's always been my favorite Companion.
Maybe the contrast with Leela, who followed Sarah Jane pretty closely
and was even less given to screaming helplessly, distorted your
perceptions?
--
The Misenchanted Page: http://www.sff.net/people/LWE/ Last update 10/1/99
DRAGON WEATHER is now available -- ISBN 0-312-86978-9
Pete McCutchen
Malthouse) wrote:
>On 04 Oct 1999 22:39:30 GMT Justin Bacon wrote:
>} In article <37f4f78b...@netnews.worldnet.att.net>,
>} p.mcc...@worldnet.att.net (Pete McCutchen) writes:
>}
>} >I thought that the Doctor said it was a "Time Lord Gift," which he
>} >somehow made available to his companions. (Mysteriously, often
>} >_before_ they were companions.)
>}
>} Wait, he's a Time Lord and it's "mysterious" to you how that happened? :)
>
>Isn't there one story where The Doctor realises that the companion of
>the season (Sarah Jane? Journalist good for nothing but screaming)
Depended on the episode. Particularly early on, when she was with
Pertwee, she was quite spunky. Unfortunately, she deteriorated as
time went on, and degenerated into asking "doctor, what's that?" and
screaming. Sort of the reverse of Grabielle on Xena, who started out
useless, and is now hell on wheels. Oh, and she had a thing about
small hills. Little inclines which one could easily walk up became
steep cliffs in the mind of Sarah Jane.
>has been influenced by Something Very Nasty(tm) because she finally
>gets round to asking "how come everyone speaks English"?
Yes. And his response is that it's a "Time Lord Gift." I forget the
episode, but it's not the one where he detected a fake because the
fake like ginger beer, which SJS hated.
Pete McCutchen
<lawr...@clark.net> wrote:
>
>I don't know, because certainly I never thought she was "good for
>nothing but screaming." She's always been my favorite Companion.
>
>Maybe the contrast with Leela, who followed Sarah Jane pretty closely
>and was even less given to screaming helplessly, distorted your
>perceptions?
>
Leela was always my favorite companion.
Favorite line: "Silence! Or I shall cut your heart out."
Second favorite line: "I am a warrior of the Sevateam; I know the
different sounds of death."
Lmundstock
>short story where the LF was whistle speech. Everyone could do it
>either naturally or with the help of a simple voder. Hmmm . . .
>maybe digital clicks, or even sign language.
I think that might be _Slac//_. First contact team encounters curiously
uncurious creatures. They use / and // in verbs, which led the scientists to
oddity about the noun "slac//." If that isn't right, feel free to tell me.
"I don't believe in coincidences. They're like leprechauns and unicorns, they
died out a long time ago."
Robert Sneddon
<p.mcc...@worldnet.att.net> writes
[Re: Dr Who and his companions]
> Oh, and she had a thing about
>small hills. Little inclines which one could easily walk up became
>steep cliffs in the mind of Sarah Jane.
That was just the BBC budget. They couldn't afford *real* steep cliffs.
--
To reply by email, send to nojay (at) public (period) antipope (dot) org
Robert Sneddon
Marcus L. Rowland
<p.mcc...@worldnet.att.net> writes
>
>Leela was always my favorite companion.
>
>Favorite line: "Silence! Or I shall cut your heart out."
>
>Second favorite line: "I am a warrior of the Sevateam; I know the
>different sounds of death."
I ran a Dr. Who RPG at an SF con a few years back, and Mary Gentle took
on the role of Leela. For various reasons the plot involved meeting John
Wayne, who was U.S. President in the timeline they'd accidentally
entered.
Leela: "I am Leela, warrior of the Sevateam!"
Wayne: "Well hi there, little lady..."
Leela: "Can I kill him now, Doctor?"
This adventure proved conclusively that it is _not_ a good idea to give
Leela (or possibly Mary) an M16 to play with...
--
Marcus L. Rowland
http://www.ffutures.demon.co.uk/ http://www.forgottenfutures.com/
"We are all victims of this slime. They... ...fill our mailboxes with gibberish
that would get them indicted if people had time to press charges"
[Hunter S. Thompson predicts junk e-mail, 1985 (from Generation of Swine)]
Captain Button
[ untranslatable text :-)} ]
> That is we will have a group of languages, with
> each one being the "universal" language for a group of species with similar
> construction of voice chords (or voice mechanism in general). As a result
> of that universal translators will be a necessary gadget for interuniversal
> (is there such a word?) communication.
This is what the Galactic Races use Brin's "Uplift" novels
do. There are about a dozen different languages, with imaginative
names like "Galactic Seven".
All normal races speak these languages, and by the nature of species
development via uplift, there are no 'native languages', IIRC.
The hydrogen breathing Jovian planet dwelling races are a different
matter, however.
--
[ but...@io.com ]"DOGBERRY: Marry, sir, they have committed false report;
moreover, they have spoken untruths; secondarily, they are slanders; sixth
and lastly, they have belied a lady; thirdly, they have verified unjust
things; and, to conclude, they are lying knaves." Shakespeare - _Much Ado.._
EdLincoln
>From: Captain Button but...@io.com
>Date: Mon, 01 November 1999 02:05 PM EST
>Message-id: <7vko9l$3hp$1...@hiram.io.com>
>
>Wild-eyed conspiracy theorists insist that on Sat, 02 Oct 1999 19:55:25
>GMT, Dimitris Tsallas <el9...@central.ntua.wrong> wrote:
>
>[ untranslatable text :-)} ]
>
>> That is we will have a group of languages, with
>> each one being the "universal" language for a group of species with similar
>> construction of voice chords (or voice mechanism in general). As a result
>> of that universal translators will be a necessary gadget for interuniversal
>> (is there such a word?) communication.
>
>This is what the Galactic Races use Brin's "Uplift" novels
>do.
That is also what they do in Rebecca Ore's "Becoming Alien" series. There is
onne language for bat like creatures, one for bird like ones, etc.