From: lesnyd@monsanto.com (Larry E. Snyder)
Subject: Re: I Borg question + a couple more(spoiler?)
Organization: DSC
Distribution: na
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 17:57:30 GMT

In article <matt.715277403@unidata.ucar.edu>, matt@unidata.ucar.edu (Matt Hicks) writes:
> 
> jverho80@ursa.calvin.edu (Jeff Verhoef) writes:
> 
> >I just watched the rerun of "I Borg," and I have a small question...
> >  (possible spoiler though)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> >Ok, I hope this works....anyway, I hope this hasn't been discussed before
> >when it originally aired.  If it has, just e-mail the answer to me.
> 
> >When Bev and Geordi have the adolescent Borg in the lab and are asking his
> >his "means of identification,"  Bev explains to him that humans have names.
> >She says, "I am Beverly, and this is Geordi."  The Borg then says, "Do *I*
> >have a name?"
> 
> This does seem to be a slip. However, we have to assume that the Borg is 
> speaking english, rather than us hearing English through some translator
> or something. Therefore, he knows english words and presumably their meanings.
> He has already said, "We are Borg," so he knows what Borg are called. He
> probably knows he would look stupid (and just possibly the writers thought
> that it would sound stupid) if he asked, "Do we have a name?" when he just
> got done saying what it is. They probably could have written the line as
> something like, "Does this unit have a name?" if they really wanted to be
> careful. The big issue of I vs. we doesn't come up til after this scene, so
> maybe they just assumed most people wouldn't notice the "I" here.

Wow. This is the most impressive case of rationalization I've seen yet! ;^)
They screwed up. To have character use the first person singular and no one
notice, then to have it be a federal case later is really poor continuity.
Let's admit it! They screwed up!
> 
> In case you wonder how I can assume that the Borg is speaking English:
> The whole "I" vs. "we" thing is a semantic argument, relevant only in the
> context of someone saying something they understand. It would be pointless
> to argue this in translation. In translation "I" would be a meaning imposed
> on another culture's language; since the Borg don't possess "I" as a con-
> cept, they couldn't have a word that translates as "I".

And he WOULDN'T HAVE SAID IT, since he doesn't know what it means!

> 
> Now another question: Where did the Borg learn English? IMHO they must
> have assimilated it, probably from Pickard, since I don't recall any of
> them speaking it in the earlier Borg episodes. Which raises the further
> and more pressing question: Haven't the Borg already assimilated individ-
> uality and ignored it? Or were they somehow able to just pull English
> out of Pickard's head without getting anything else? The only answer that
> I've been able to come up with is that Hugh's individuality will be more
> insidious because it is in his _programming_ and not in the rather more
> messy structures of a human brain.
> 
> This was probably my favorite episode of the show. Not perfect, but some
> great ideas introduced, some great teasers for future episodes, and the
> possibility for some great discussion.

I enjoyed it, too, but that one silly mistake is galling...

> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> >--
> >   ///\\\      Jeff Verhoef             "Sometimes I wish I could go where no
> >  ///  \\\     Calvin College            man has gone before....but I'll
> > ///    \\\ Grand Rapids, MI 49546       probably stay in Aurora."  --Garth
> 
> --
> _________________________________________________  /\_/\  _________________
> Matthew  B.  Hicks     | Unidata Program Center | ((ovo))  The spotted owl:
> matt@unidata.ucar.edu  | UCAR, PO Box 3000      | ():::()  the other "other
> 303/497-8676	       | Boulder, CO 80307-3000 |   VVV    white meat."   
> 
>