Inquisitor772 x Penny Arcade Fight Club ChampionA fixed point in space and timeRegistered Userregular
Yeah I agree, I love the episode, I'm just pointing out that in this one, the technobabble is based on linguistics rather than, I dunno, tachyon particles.
Maybe it would've worked better for me if the writers had come up with more than a handful of sentences for them Picard's super short cliff notes version of Gilgamesh and Enkidu had as much content as all of their language over the whole episode.
Darmok works as an allegory but absolutely falls apart from a technical perspective. So, in other words, it's exactly like every other Star Trek episode, ever.
All language is based on imagery and metaphor, and is intrinsically linked with the context from which it developed and in which it is used. There's absolutely no reason the universal translator wouldn't work in this case unless it doesn't work for pretty much every single Earth-based language.
See you say that, but it gets wonky when you put it in practice. As an example I offer you a board game my beloved spouse and I played with a couple of friends. It is a team based game, but all communication has to be done so everyone can hear it. Upon learning this rule I get a stupid smile on my face and say "Darkmok and Jelad at Tenagra." To which she replies "Temba, his arms wide." Our friend not explaining the rules then looks at his partner and saws "We're screwed." Both knew it had something to do with Star Trek, and it was in English, but could not derive any meaning from it.
We eventually went into Discworld and television references we believed in neither had seen. With a perfect understanding of each word we chose they were lost because the words had no consistent meaning, and the context was never established during the game. They even hint at this in the episode where they try to track down exactly which historical figure they might be referencing when trying to talk to them. Is it perfect? No, but I can see why a society that hasn't had to work to interpret any language for a long time would struggle to solve this particular puzzle.
On a most certainly unrelated note everyone refuses to play said game against my beloved spouse and myself. Buncha sore losers.
Darmok raises the question of how do they teach such a language to their own children. If everything in the language is a metaphor, how do you gain that knowledge of the background meaning in the first place without having more basic language structures?
Just remember that half the people you meet are below average intelligence.
Darmok raises the question of how do they teach such a language to their own children. If everything in the language is a metaphor, how do you gain that knowledge of the background meaning in the first place without having more basic language structures?
They take their kid to an isolated area with a dangerous monster, and they stay there until the kid gets it, or one of them dies. Obviously!
The trouble with having an open mind, of course, is that people will insist on coming along and trying to put things in it. ~ Terry Pratchett
Darmok raises the question of how do they teach such a language to their own children. If everything in the language is a metaphor, how do you gain that knowledge of the background meaning in the first place without having more basic language structures?
They take their kid to an isolated area with a dangerous monster, and they stay there until the kid gets it, or one of them dies. Obviously!
"Dad, his shuttle ascending."
Just remember that half the people you meet are below average intelligence.
Probably a lot of artwork depicting the events and people which serve as the lexicon of their language. I would imagine theater productions and music help to retain and propogate meaning to successive generations as well.
GONG-00 on
Black lives matter.
Law and Order ≠ Justice
ACNH Island Isla Cero: DA-3082-2045-4142
Captain of the SES Comptroller of the State
Darmok works as an allegory but absolutely falls apart from a technical perspective. So, in other words, it's exactly like every other Star Trek episode, ever.
All language is based on imagery and metaphor, and is intrinsically linked with the context from which it developed and in which it is used. There's absolutely no reason the universal translator wouldn't work in this case unless it doesn't work for pretty much every single Earth-based language.
See you say that, but it gets wonky when you put it in practice. As an example I offer you a board game my beloved spouse and I played with a couple of friends. It is a team based game, but all communication has to be done so everyone can hear it. Upon learning this rule I get a stupid smile on my face and say "Darkmok and Jelad at Tenagra." To which she replies "Temba, his arms wide." Our friend not explaining the rules then looks at his partner and saws "We're screwed." Both knew it had something to do with Star Trek, and it was in English, but could not derive any meaning from it.
We eventually went into Discworld and television references we believed in neither had seen. With a perfect understanding of each word we chose they were lost because the words had no consistent meaning, and the context was never established during the game. They even hint at this in the episode where they try to track down exactly which historical figure they might be referencing when trying to talk to them. Is it perfect? No, but I can see why a society that hasn't had to work to interpret any language for a long time would struggle to solve this particular puzzle.
On a most certainly unrelated note everyone refuses to play said game against my beloved spouse and myself. Buncha sore losers.
Darmok raises the question of how do they teach such a language to their own children. If everything in the language is a metaphor, how do you gain that knowledge of the background meaning in the first place without having more basic language structures?
Darmok raises the question of how do they teach such a language to their own children. If everything in the language is a metaphor, how do you gain that knowledge of the background meaning in the first place without having more basic language structures?
TanagraTube.com has all the memes
This is actually an excellent point, because memes can become really twisted and esoteric, but you understand them through knowing the base memes that create them.
Like this pertinent example
This only makes sense if you understand both cultural references it's making. It's kind of similar to the idea the episode was trying to convey.
I've been talking to my friends about this for a while and they all think i'm off base but..... Maybe the Romulans created the Borg? Either as a weapon or as some form of a species "upgrade". this would track on why the Borg cube went through collapse when they assimilated the Romulans. They built a backdoor so they could not be assimilated in that way.
As a wild theory wouldn't it make more sense to say that the emotionless Vulcans are the robot people and they kicked the Romulans off their home planet in a terminator-esque AI uprising?
I've been talking to my friends about this for a while and they all think i'm off base but..... Maybe the Romulans created the Borg? Either as a weapon or as some form of a species "upgrade". this would track on why the Borg cube went through collapse when they assimilated the Romulans. They built a backdoor so they could not be assimilated in that way.
As a wild theory wouldn't it make more sense to say that the emotionless Vulcans are the robot people and they kicked the Romulans off their home planet in a terminator-esque AI uprising?
Vulcan’s aren’t emotionless. They are super repressed because they make toddlers look stable when they let their emotions out.
I've been talking to my friends about this for a while and they all think i'm off base but..... Maybe the Romulans created the Borg? Either as a weapon or as some form of a species "upgrade". this would track on why the Borg cube went through collapse when they assimilated the Romulans. They built a backdoor so they could not be assimilated in that way.
As a wild theory wouldn't it make more sense to say that the emotionless Vulcans are the robot people and they kicked the Romulans off their home planet in a terminator-esque AI uprising?
Vulcan’s aren’t emotionless. They are super repressed because they make toddlers look stable when they let their emotions out.
Almost like machines trying to synthesise thought processes they don't understand because they have no evolutionary basis for them!
Darmok raises the question of how do they teach such a language to their own children. If everything in the language is a metaphor, how do you gain that knowledge of the background meaning in the first place without having more basic language structures?
Honestly, it would be exactly the same way that we teach language to our children.
It's like when you hear the phrase "the pot calling the kettle black" in childhood and you come to understand it through context. You don't also need to understand that kettles used to be made of silver, and silver tarnishes black, while pots are made of cast iron and start out black. Hardly anyone in modern times who has heard of or used that phrase has ever polished a silver kettle.
"If you divide the whole world into just enemies and friends, you'll end up destroying everything" --Nausicaa of the Valley of Wind
Darmok raises the question of how do they teach such a language to their own children. If everything in the language is a metaphor, how do you gain that knowledge of the background meaning in the first place without having more basic language structures?
Honestly, it would be exactly the same way that we teach language to our children.
It's like when you hear the phrase "the pot calling the kettle black" in childhood and you come to understand it through context. You don't also need to understand that kettles used to be made of silver, and silver tarnishes black, while pots are made of cast iron and start out black. Hardly anyone in modern times who has heard of or used that phrase has ever polished a silver kettle.
But if you say that phrase and I ask you "what does that mean?", you would actually be able to explain it it simpler, non-metaphorical terms. Which is how you normally teach new metaphors to people because there are practical limits to self learning through context. If you could only explain it by replying with other metaphors, if I don't already know the "language", I would have the same "what does that mean?" question for each one. If it's metaphors all the way down, you can never get to a base meaning for anything.
And there's also the issue of specificity. How do you say simple things like "Hand me that 3/8 wrench" unless there's some weirdly specific metaphor about someone giving someone a 3/8 wrench. And if there are metaphors like that for every possible size wrench, then they're not metaphors any more so the whole idea of a language entirely of metaphors breaks down.
It's an ok concept to use as a plot device for that episode, it'd just be useless as an actual language. They'd certainly never be able to develop math, science, and engineering to become a spacefaring race with it.
Just remember that half the people you meet are below average intelligence.
+2
Options
CambiataCommander ShepardThe likes of which even GAWD has never seenRegistered Userregular
Darmok raises the question of how do they teach such a language to their own children. If everything in the language is a metaphor, how do you gain that knowledge of the background meaning in the first place without having more basic language structures?
Honestly, it would be exactly the same way that we teach language to our children.
It's like when you hear the phrase "the pot calling the kettle black" in childhood and you come to understand it through context. You don't also need to understand that kettles used to be made of silver, and silver tarnishes black, while pots are made of cast iron and start out black. Hardly anyone in modern times who has heard of or used that phrase has ever polished a silver kettle.
But if you say that phrase and I ask you "what does that mean?", you would actually be able to explain it it simpler, non-metaphorical terms. Which is how you normally teach new metaphors to people because there are practical limits to self learning through context. If you could only explain it by replying with other metaphors, if I don't already know the "language", I would have the same "what does that mean?" question for each one. If it's metaphors all the way down, you can never get to a base meaning for anything.
And there's also the issue of specificity. How do you say simple things like "Hand me that 3/8 wrench" unless there's some weirdly specific metaphor about someone giving someone a 3/8 wrench. And if there are metaphors like that for every possible size wrench, then they're not metaphors any more so the whole idea of a language entirely of metaphors breaks down.
It's an ok concept to use as a plot device for that episode, it'd just be useless as an actual language. They'd certainly never be able to develop math, science, and engineering to become a spacefaring race with it.
I mean you can also apply my descriptions above to just regular words. A child can be standing before a giant vehicle, and say, "what is that?" and you say "a tractor!", at no point do you need to explain to the child that the word "tractor" comes from the Latin "tractus" which means "pull." The history of the word isn't really important, you just explain this word means this thing. I would think metaphor-language is similar - this metaphor means this thing. Maybe you think they pack too many ideas into too small of a phrase, but we haven't heard the entire language, and additionally the other captain probably used as simple language as possible to help Picard understand - he understood that he needed to repeat the same "word" (in their case, an entire phrase for a word) over and over again until Picard was able to understand.
"If you divide the whole world into just enemies and friends, you'll end up destroying everything" --Nausicaa of the Valley of Wind
It's also great as a "secret language", like Gnizmo's anecdote above, for obfuscating and coding meaning while otherwise communicating "in the clear". But again, in that context, the whole reason to use it is its opacity to those who don't have the same cultural referents - the same "vocabulary", as it were.
0
Options
Inquisitor772 x Penny Arcade Fight Club ChampionA fixed point in space and timeRegistered Userregular
The thing about the Tamarian language is that the only thing stopping the Universal Translator from working should just be exposure over time. Otherwise Universal Translators wouldn't work at all.
Darmok raises the question of how do they teach such a language to their own children. If everything in the language is a metaphor, how do you gain that knowledge of the background meaning in the first place without having more basic language structures?
Honestly, it would be exactly the same way that we teach language to our children.
It's like when you hear the phrase "the pot calling the kettle black" in childhood and you come to understand it through context. You don't also need to understand that kettles used to be made of silver, and silver tarnishes black, while pots are made of cast iron and start out black. Hardly anyone in modern times who has heard of or used that phrase has ever polished a silver kettle.
But if you say that phrase and I ask you "what does that mean?", you would actually be able to explain it it simpler, non-metaphorical terms. Which is how you normally teach new metaphors to people because there are practical limits to self learning through context. If you could only explain it by replying with other metaphors, if I don't already know the "language", I would have the same "what does that mean?" question for each one. If it's metaphors all the way down, you can never get to a base meaning for anything.
And there's also the issue of specificity. How do you say simple things like "Hand me that 3/8 wrench" unless there's some weirdly specific metaphor about someone giving someone a 3/8 wrench. And if there are metaphors like that for every possible size wrench, then they're not metaphors any more so the whole idea of a language entirely of metaphors breaks down.
It's an ok concept to use as a plot device for that episode, it'd just be useless as an actual language. They'd certainly never be able to develop math, science, and engineering to become a spacefaring race with it.
I mean you can also apply my descriptions above to just regular words. A child can be standing before a giant vehicle, and say, "what is that?" and you say "a tractor!", at no point do you need to explain to the child that the word "tractor" comes from the Latin "tractus" which means "pull." The history of the word isn't really important, you just explain this word means this thing. I would think metaphor-language is similar - this metaphor means this thing. Maybe you think they pack too many ideas into too small of a phrase, but we haven't heard the entire language, and additionally the other captain probably used as simple language as possible to help Picard understand - he understood that he needed to repeat the same "word" (in their case, an entire phrase for a word) over and over again until Picard was able to understand.
"Metaphor = object" is not a metaphor though. At that point it's just the name of the object, aka a noun.
Just remember that half the people you meet are below average intelligence.
+1
Options
Inquisitor772 x Penny Arcade Fight Club ChampionA fixed point in space and timeRegistered Userregular
Language itself is a metaphor. The word "chair" is not an actual chair.
I think it helps if you think of it not as their entire language being metaphor, but maybe only more abstract concepts like peace and negotiation. Like, obviously there's enough there that the translator can pick up proper nouns, posessives, physical objects like arms and walls, descriptors like wide open.
So in the wrench example, they might say something like "Bob, on Christmas, the 3/8 wrench. "
0
Options
Inquisitor772 x Penny Arcade Fight Club ChampionA fixed point in space and timeRegistered Userregular
Right - if you point at a giant red truck and say "firetruck" then a small child will call any large, crimson vehicle (or vehicle-shaped thing) as a "firetruck". So the "meaning" of the word "firetruck" is "big red boxy thing". To her, there is no association with fires or trucks until you add a referent to those things and set further semantic boundaries.
The Universal Translator would, one assumes, work the same way. It doesn't give a shit who Darmok and Jalad are, or where Tanagra is. If you are using the audio pattern consisting of "Darmok and Jalad at Tanagra" to indicate "teamwork", then that's the primary correlation it will establish. The issue is whether or not it has enough exposure to the phrase being used to extract that relationship or not, much like you have to point at different types of trucks before the concept of "truck" fully develops (and even then, reasonable people can disagree on what constitutes a truck).
0
Options
CambiataCommander ShepardThe likes of which even GAWD has never seenRegistered Userregular
I mean, we don't really know how the universal translator works and never really have. It's just a writer's convenience. If such a device truly existed, we would never have heard words like Qapla' because the universal translator would just have Worf saying "Success!" in a really aggressive tone every time he used the word.
"If you divide the whole world into just enemies and friends, you'll end up destroying everything" --Nausicaa of the Valley of Wind
+7
Options
Inquisitor772 x Penny Arcade Fight Club ChampionA fixed point in space and timeRegistered Userregular
I mean, we don't really know how the universal translator works and never really have. It's just a writer's convenience. If such a device truly existed, we would never have heard words like Qapla' because the universal translator would just have Worf saying "Success!" in a really aggressive tone every time he used the word.
I still have yet to hear a good explanation for why Klingon doesn't get translated half the time.
0
Options
CambiataCommander ShepardThe likes of which even GAWD has never seenRegistered Userregular
"If you divide the whole world into just enemies and friends, you'll end up destroying everything" --Nausicaa of the Valley of Wind
+15
Options
surrealitychecklonely, but not unloveddreaming of faulty keys and latchesRegistered Userregular
the translator would know its linguistic frame! any such system would know the lexicon and translate accordingly, then use semantic processing to work out what the target audience of an utterance has in the way of linguistic capabilities etc
the translator would know its linguistic frame! any such system would know the lexicon and translate accordingly, then use semantic processing to work out what the target audience of an utterance has in the way of linguistic capabilities etc
A wild surrealitycheck appears!
Maybe you have a point but this still don't explain how the translator switches between Klingon and English when a Qo'nos native comes aboard, smarty pants.
"If you divide the whole world into just enemies and friends, you'll end up destroying everything" --Nausicaa of the Valley of Wind
0
Options
surrealitychecklonely, but not unloveddreaming of faulty keys and latchesRegistered Userregular
the translator would know its linguistic frame! any such system would know the lexicon and translate accordingly, then use semantic processing to work out what the target audience of an utterance has in the way of linguistic capabilities etc
A wild surrealitycheck appears!
Maybe you have a point but this still don't explain how the translator switches between Klingon and English when a Qo'nos native comes aboard, smarty pants.
deep learning.... big data... neural netwroks... the cloud.... amazon.com...
+8
Options
Inquisitor772 x Penny Arcade Fight Club ChampionA fixed point in space and timeRegistered Userregular
edited February 2020
That Twitter thread is basically the opening creak of the Pandora's Box that is the philosophy of language.
Inquisitor77 on
+1
Options
CambiataCommander ShepardThe likes of which even GAWD has never seenRegistered Userregular
the translator would know its linguistic frame! any such system would know the lexicon and translate accordingly, then use semantic processing to work out what the target audience of an utterance has in the way of linguistic capabilities etc
A wild surrealitycheck appears!
Maybe you have a point but this still don't explain how the translator switches between Klingon and English when a Qo'nos native comes aboard, smarty pants.
deep learning.... big data... neural netwroks... the cloud.... amazon.com...
THE CLOUD DOES NOT WORK LIKE THAT. GOOD NIGHT!
"If you divide the whole world into just enemies and friends, you'll end up destroying everything" --Nausicaa of the Valley of Wind
If you can buy into the concept of a universal translator even existing and working as well at it does, it's not a stretch to imagine it can figure out loan words from other languages becoming proper nouns in a different language.
I mean, we don't really know how the universal translator works and never really have. It's just a writer's convenience. If such a device truly existed, we would never have heard words like Qapla' because the universal translator would just have Worf saying "Success!" in a really aggressive tone every time he used the word.
I still have yet to hear a good explanation for why Klingon doesn't get translated half the time.
Because it sounds cool when it doesn't.
The sky was full of stars, every star an exploding ship. One of ours.
First off, and this is sort of a nitpick but also sort of not, they have three characters named Raffi, Rizzo, and Rios. As a friend put it, "see me after class." This is TV writing 101; you don't have two characters named Maxwell and...Haxwell or something. It's not some kind of insurmountable obstancle but it breaks the flow for a crucial second or two here and there as you furrow your brow to try and recall who is who and it's like...why.
Posts
See you say that, but it gets wonky when you put it in practice. As an example I offer you a board game my beloved spouse and I played with a couple of friends. It is a team based game, but all communication has to be done so everyone can hear it. Upon learning this rule I get a stupid smile on my face and say "Darkmok and Jelad at Tenagra." To which she replies "Temba, his arms wide." Our friend not explaining the rules then looks at his partner and saws "We're screwed." Both knew it had something to do with Star Trek, and it was in English, but could not derive any meaning from it.
We eventually went into Discworld and television references we believed in neither had seen. With a perfect understanding of each word we chose they were lost because the words had no consistent meaning, and the context was never established during the game. They even hint at this in the episode where they try to track down exactly which historical figure they might be referencing when trying to talk to them. Is it perfect? No, but I can see why a society that hasn't had to work to interpret any language for a long time would struggle to solve this particular puzzle.
On a most certainly unrelated note everyone refuses to play said game against my beloved spouse and myself. Buncha sore losers.
They take their kid to an isolated area with a dangerous monster, and they stay there until the kid gets it, or one of them dies. Obviously!
"Dad, his shuttle ascending."
Law and Order ≠ Justice
ACNH Island Isla Cero: DA-3082-2045-4142
Captain of the SES Comptroller of the State
um I fucking love this story
TanagraTube.com has all the memes
This is actually an excellent point, because memes can become really twisted and esoteric, but you understand them through knowing the base memes that create them.
Like this pertinent example
This only makes sense if you understand both cultural references it's making. It's kind of similar to the idea the episode was trying to convey.
so much so spot here but most potent is probably brent spiners hand sneaking into the pocket in front
Honestly, it would be exactly the same way that we teach language to our children.
It's like when you hear the phrase "the pot calling the kettle black" in childhood and you come to understand it through context. You don't also need to understand that kettles used to be made of silver, and silver tarnishes black, while pots are made of cast iron and start out black. Hardly anyone in modern times who has heard of or used that phrase has ever polished a silver kettle.
But if you say that phrase and I ask you "what does that mean?", you would actually be able to explain it it simpler, non-metaphorical terms. Which is how you normally teach new metaphors to people because there are practical limits to self learning through context. If you could only explain it by replying with other metaphors, if I don't already know the "language", I would have the same "what does that mean?" question for each one. If it's metaphors all the way down, you can never get to a base meaning for anything.
And there's also the issue of specificity. How do you say simple things like "Hand me that 3/8 wrench" unless there's some weirdly specific metaphor about someone giving someone a 3/8 wrench. And if there are metaphors like that for every possible size wrench, then they're not metaphors any more so the whole idea of a language entirely of metaphors breaks down.
It's an ok concept to use as a plot device for that episode, it'd just be useless as an actual language. They'd certainly never be able to develop math, science, and engineering to become a spacefaring race with it.
I mean you can also apply my descriptions above to just regular words. A child can be standing before a giant vehicle, and say, "what is that?" and you say "a tractor!", at no point do you need to explain to the child that the word "tractor" comes from the Latin "tractus" which means "pull." The history of the word isn't really important, you just explain this word means this thing. I would think metaphor-language is similar - this metaphor means this thing. Maybe you think they pack too many ideas into too small of a phrase, but we haven't heard the entire language, and additionally the other captain probably used as simple language as possible to help Picard understand - he understood that he needed to repeat the same "word" (in their case, an entire phrase for a word) over and over again until Picard was able to understand.
"Metaphor = object" is not a metaphor though. At that point it's just the name of the object, aka a noun.
So in the wrench example, they might say something like "Bob, on Christmas, the 3/8 wrench. "
The Universal Translator would, one assumes, work the same way. It doesn't give a shit who Darmok and Jalad are, or where Tanagra is. If you are using the audio pattern consisting of "Darmok and Jalad at Tanagra" to indicate "teamwork", then that's the primary correlation it will establish. The issue is whether or not it has enough exposure to the phrase being used to extract that relationship or not, much like you have to point at different types of trucks before the concept of "truck" fully develops (and even then, reasonable people can disagree on what constitutes a truck).
I still have yet to hear a good explanation for why Klingon doesn't get translated half the time.
every single one.
A wild surrealitycheck appears!
Maybe you have a point but this still don't explain how the translator switches between Klingon and English when a Qo'nos native comes aboard, smarty pants.
deep learning.... big data... neural netwroks... the cloud.... amazon.com...
THE CLOUD DOES NOT WORK LIKE THAT. GOOD NIGHT!
"Yes. All according to keikaku."
Because it sounds cool when it doesn't.
except for that one world named Water where the dolphins came from.