LL-L: "Software localization" LOWLANDS-L, 01.AUG.2000 (03) [E]

Tue Aug 1 14:58:53 UTC 2000

 ======================================================================
 L O W L A N D S - L * 01.AUG.2000 (03) * ISSN 189-5582 * LCSN 96-4226
 Posting Address: <lowlands-l at listserv.linguistlist.org>
 Web Site: <http://www.geocities.com/sassisch/rhahn/lowlands/>
 User's Manual: <http://www.lsoft.com/manuals/1.8c/userindex.html>
 Archive: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/archives/lowlands-l.html>
 =======================================================================
 A=Afrikaans, Ap=Appalachean, D=Dutch, E=English, F=Frisian, L=Limburgish
 LS=Low Saxon (Low German), S=Scots, Sh=Shetlandic
 =======================================================================

From: Henry Pijffers [hpijffers at home.nl]
Subject: Software localisation

Dear list members,

This message is targeted at all speakers of languages of which there isn't
any localised software available in their language. The last part applies to
Low-Saxon / Low-German speakers particularly.

As I may have said before, I'm trying to get versions of software in
Low-Saxon.
Currently, this means I have to translate everything myself. For some
software,
Lingoware (www.lingoware.com) is doing a fine job, I have Notepad and Freecell
in Low-Saxon for example and I'm working on my mailtool. However, this is a
process were everybody is creating translations for themselves. A lot of
effort
being wasted... Added to that, Lingoware has to be constantly running on your
machine, and sometimes it isn't translating things very well, which results in
weird constructions.

My goal is to have a centre for localised software, were users can get copies
of their favourite software in their language. Another feature of such a
centre might
be to let people work together on a new translation for a certain piece of
software.
I might be able to persuade my boss into hosting such a centre on our
webserver,
as we're currently looking for opportunities of demonstrating our webplatform
(for
free if necessary, such as in this case).

A nice starting point might be the latest version of the Netscape browser,
which is
to be released later this year (there are already versions in Plautdietsch and
in Welsh).
You might argue that Netscape is a lost case of course, but I think of it this
way:
if we can get enough translations in languages spoken by a large enough
userbase,
we might be able to persuade other browser makers (read: Microsoft with their
Internet Explorer) to create more localised versions or enable us to create
those
ourselves. This may be a bold goal, but hey, if we can do that, think of the
possible
impact on the industry... If you can set Microsoft to your hand, you can do
that with
almost any other company.

If we can reach some of the above, a side effect might be some more
recognition of
our "minority" languages (minority as considered by the ruling language) by
people
speaking Dutch, German, English, or any other ruling language.

At least for Low-Saxon this means we really have to agree on some kind of
standard.
Without that, I might as well put this message in my bin without sending it.
So here's
a request for comment to all Low-Saxon / Low-Saxon speakers outthere. Can we
work together an decide on a standard? Ron and I conversed a little in
Low-Saxon and
it gave me the impression that if we both put a little water in the wine, we
shouldn't
have much problems doing this. As for Netscape (or should I say Mozilla?) we
may
have some problems, because it is targeted for relase later this year, which
is quite
soon. But that's ok I think, we could always decide to go with a temporary
standard,
and improve on that, as we work to a definitive version.

Well, let me know what you think of it, am I just daydreaming here,
or did I really think of something that makes sense for a change?

regards,
Henry Pijffers

--
Roses are red
Violets are blue
I have a language
And I demand to speak it!

----------

From: R. F. Hahn [sassisch at yahoo.com]
Subject: Software localization

Henry, Lowlanders,

I quite agree that the only way you can get people to stop waffling and to
face the issue of standardization in Low Saxon (Low German) is by publishing
important material using a certain system.  The usual, inevitable questions
then are "Who?" and "How?"  So far there has been no more than these questions
and all sorts of "But ..." responses.  Maybe it is time to ignore them and
just act.

For the benefit of those of you who are not already aware of it, let me
explain that until very recently Low Saxon (Low German) in the Netherlands was
de facto officially considered a set of "Saxon dialects of Dutch (or
"Netherlandic")," and Low Saxon (Low German) in Northern Germany was
considered a group of German dialects.  It was assumed that the language
therefore needed no standard variety since Standard Dutch and Standard German
were to serve as the speakers' respective standard languages.  As for
orthography, it was not considered an important issue, since dialect writing
is not seen as formal, and it is assumed that each written dialect will base
its orthographic devices on the system of the respective standard languages.
Thus, Low Saxon in the Netherlands tends to be written using Dutch devices
(e.g., _oe_ for the [u] or [u:] sounds, which speakers in Germany want to read
as [ø] or [ø:], and _u_ or _uu_ for the [y:] sound which speakers in Germany
want to pronounce as [u:]), and on the German side of the border German
devices are used (e.g., ü, ö, ä, and ß, and _u_ or _uu_ for the [u:] sound
which speakers in the Netherlands want to read as [y:], and German-type
lengthening "h" which adds to the confusion).  However, even though there are
recommended orthographic guidelines, most writers come up with their own
orthographic varieties, and the whole thing is quite messy.  As far as I am
aware, the hot potato of standardization has not been touched since the
language came to be officially recognized as a regional language (_streektaal_
in the Netherlands, _Regionalsprache_ in Germany) in the Netherlands and
Germany.  If the language is to be taken seriously and wants to enjoy some
measure of independence, it "must" undergo some sort of unification and
standardization.  Unfortunately, many speakers naively assume that this would
endanger their individual, beloved dialects, that from then on they would all
have to write in Standard Low Saxon.  Of course this does not necessarily
follow.  While a standard variety would serve as an inter-dialectal variety,
individual dialects would still be able to be spoken and written.

Henry, I could see that it would be relatively easy to devise an orthographic
system that would suit all Low Saxon dialects and would be acceptable to
speakers on both sides of the border, if we all "add some water to the wine,"
as you said.  Note that I say "would suit all Low Saxon dialects."  What I
have in mind is a uniform spelling system that can be used for each and every
dialect.  This is unrelated to the issue of creating a standard language
variety, and I feel we should treat these two as separate issues and tasks.

As I see it, the main dilemma you would face in localizing software in Low
Saxon would not be the orthographic one but the variety choice one.  Which of
the following methods would you choose?

(1) create a standard language variety (that is understandable to speakers
everywhere), and to do so in a rush (i.e., in time for the project)

(2) choose one of the existing dialects (perhaps tweaking it here and there)
that is understandable to speakers everywhere -- if so, which dialect?

Best regards,

Reinhard/Ron

==================================END===================================
 You have received this because your account has been subscribed upon
 request. To unsubscribe, please send the command "signoff lowlands-l"
 as message text from the same account to
 <listserv at listserv.linguistlist.org> or sign off at
 <http://linguistlist.org/subscribing/sub-lowlands-l.html>.
 =======================================================================
 * Please submit contributions to <lowlands-l at listserv.linguistlist.org>.
 * Contributions will be displayed unedited in digest form.
 * Please display only the relevant parts of quotes in your replies.
 * Commands for automated functions (including "signoff lowlands-l") are
   to be sent to <listserv at listserv.linguistlist.org> or at
   <http://linguistlist.org/subscribing/sub-lowlands-l.html>.
 * Please use only Plain Text format, not Rich Text (HTML) or any other
   type of format, in your submissions
 =======================================================================