graphemes

[Michael McCafferty]

Thank you, John, for this very interesting message. Dr. Karttunen wrote 
to me off-list to explain the origin of the k/w spelling.

All best,

Michael



Quoting "John Sullivan, Ph.D." <idiez at me.com>:

> Listeros,
> 	It is important to distinguish between sound documentation and
> spelling systems. If you want to represent sounds, you will
> eventually  have to create separate systems for each town, and as
> science  progresses, for each household and each native speaker. This
> is fine  for linguists and for teaching Nahuatl as a second language
> if you've  decided to eliminate the possibility of using native
> speakers as  instructors. But it will eliminate any hope of using
> writing as a  means of communication for native speakers. And this is
> fine if your  goal is the extinction of Nahuatl language and culture.
> 	Spelling systems, on the other hand, are a product of tradition. In
> Nahuatl, the use of digraphs comes originally from Spanish, but their
>  use was standardized to a great degree by the native speakers who
> created the immense corpus of Older written Nahuatl during the
> Colonial Period. The Mexican education system has gone to great
> lengths to separate native speakers from their written cultural
> legacy. So it is not strange that Miguel Barrios would think that by
> using the "k" and the "w", he is affirming his indigenous identity.
> He  obviously does not realize that he is actually widening the chasm
>  between Modern native speakers and their written cultural heritage.
> 	Is Miguel Barrios attempting to use letters to represent sounds? If
> so, why does he use one letter, the "n", to represent both a voiced
> nasal, such as the "n" in "tonal", and a devoiced nasal, such as the
> "n" at the end of "Kaxtillan"? Why is he using a single "l" in
> "tonal"  and a double "l" in "kaxtillan"? Why does he not represent
> the  devoiced "w" at the end of "itonalama"? If you want to depart
> from  tradition, fine, but you need to put your money where your
> mouth is.  Why is it that no one has proposed to change the horrible
> English  spelling system? First, because as I said, the result would
> be that  from now on, no native speaker would be able to read
> Shakespeare, Walt  Witman or Gloria Anzaldúa. Second, your first task
> would be to  dedicate the rest of your life (actually you would need
> a team to  continue after your death) writing a dictionary
> (preferably  monolingual) that applies your new system to every word
> in the  language. Because spelling systems are not codified by
> government  decrees or the whims of individuals; they are codified by
> dictionaries.
> 	There is also a thing called "standing on the shoulders of giants".
> Unless you are blinded by extreme Narcisism, you would see that in
> the  long history of Nahuatl alphabetic writing, many people actually
> have  dedicated their lives to the rigorous work of making
> dictionaries. And  when I say "dictionary", I don't mean "glossary"
> or "vocabulary",  because there is a big difference. Molina, Simeon,
> Campbell and  Kartunnen, for example, form a long tradition of giants
> who build on  the work of their predecessors. So, if you want to
> continue the  tradition, either go out and buy a dictionary or start
> making one. And  if you want to break with tradition, then sit down
> and get to work on  your dictionary.
> 	Lastly, and this is a rhetorical question, why do you suppose it is
> that in the many decades and billiones of pesos that have been
> invested in Mexican indigenous education, not a single reference work
>  (dictionary, thesaurus, grammar, encyclopedia) has been produced for
>  use in the system?
> John
>
> John Sullivan, Ph.D.
> Professor of Nahua language and culture
> Universidad Autónoma de Zacatecas
> Zacatecas Institute of Teaching and Research in Ethnology
> Tacuba 152, int. 43
> Centro Histórico
> Zacatecas, Zac. 98000
> Mexico
> Work: +52 (492) 925-3415
> Home: +52 (492) 768-6048
> Mobile: +52 (492) 103-0195
> idiez at me.com
>
> On Apr 22, 2009, at 2:35 AM, magnus hansen wrote:
>
>> Dear Michael
>>
>> I use w, k and s for writing modern nawatl that doesn't have any
>> established orthography - and I do use macrons to mark vowel length
>> when it is practical (i.e. not in quick e-mails) - and I have been
>> ridiculed for it before on this list.
>>
>> I do it to avoid digraphs and confusing double meanings of a single
>> letter (h for writing saltillo and for w, u for writing w, kw, and
>> k, q for writing kw and k, c for writing k and s, z for writing s
>> and ts, ) - and to help (english speaking) lay persons achieve a
>> better pronunciation and for example say ['na.watl] in stead of
>> [na.hu.'at.el]. And then I do it because some native speakers (like
>> Miguel Barrios Espinosa for example) prefer it because they find
>> that it is easier to learn in writing, and that it gives more of a
>> separate identity to their language.
>>
>> Barrios writes in the introduction to the first issue of Mexihkatl
>> itonalama: "Inin totlahtol okse: tleka tikihkwiloskeh kemen
>> kaxtillan?"
>>
>> And what's wrong with Goethe anyway?
>>
>> Magnus Pharao Hansen
>> _______________________________________________
>> Nahuatl mailing list
>> Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
>> http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl
>
>
>
>




_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl