Orthography, standardization, and interpretation of unwritten components

[Jeffrey Kopp]

I couldn't get Stan Anoby's paper to come up, but when I put the URL into
Google it came back with the extension in upper case (viz.,
<http://www.und.edu/dept/linguistics/theses/1997Anonby.PDF>), which does
retrieve the doc.

I can see how the process of classroom teaching of Wawa would be
facilitated by establishment and recognition of a "benchmark" form.  Such
is done for English, although we all know it ain't standard in usage. (My
son's English teacher wanted more commas, so I said just give her more
commas, but then go read some Hemingway to see how few you actually need.)
It's the "prerogative" of whomever's doing the research and conducting the
classes to select the benchmark point.

Of course the selection will strike others as arbitrary. We have to accept
its necessity for the purpose of methodical instruction. Conversely,
though, we mustn't lose sight of the fact that in actual use the Jargon was
pretty fluid, and its flexibility in structure and pronunciation combined
with its compact vocabulary is what made it work (i.e., mutual
intelligibility among such diverse groups). It also morphed rapidly
post-contact, changing at a rate I'd guess about 5-10x of English's
evolution during the frontier centuries.

While I read Gibbs/Shaw/Thomas orthography with greater ease than the email
version of the "new," about a year after it came into use here I could
start to follow it. (I'm still unable to speak it either way.)

The computer, of course, imposes some need for a standard orthography for
the purpose of automated search and retrieval. A Ph.D. in-law of mine,
trying to construct a database of medieval place and family names on his
then-new Osborne I, asked me if some computer program could do phonetic
matching, as recorded names varied widely in spelling before the 20th
century. (He was working on the 16th. And whatever happened to the "e" in
William Clarke?). I replied that naval communications software (this was
early in the microcomputer era) could be set to accept or ignore a
percentage of difference in the spelling of addressees (due to errors
accrued in radio propagation), but I had no clue what could be done
differing lengths in written syllables. Today there is probably some
linguistic software that can, but Web search engines still usually need a
letter-by-letter match (although some now suggest alternate spellings on
searches for non-dictionary words).

(For example: I am stumped by Phil's reference to "Pushtins";  Is there
another way of spelling it?)

I must stand corrected on my post about Qualchan's last words; upon further
reading, I found most sources specify 15 to 20 minutes elapsed between his
arrival at Col. Wright's camp (usu. given as 9 am) and his execution
(during which brief interval he was "convicted" by Wright). So more must
have been said than the brief quote which has been preserved (although he
was likely given very little opportunity to speak).

I'd agree with Henry that in "Nica Halo Bottlum"  attributed to Chief
Joseph, "pahtlum" was most likely said. However, note the shift in meaning
which occurs with the correction (from "I don't touch the stuff" to "I
never get drunk"), although the former may well have been the intended
meaning. Unfortunately the emphasis and gestures which were an essential
part conveying meaning in Jargon communication (alongside context) didn't
get written down, so we have to "mind-read" the translator to guess how
much of it is incorporated into the offered interpretation, how much is
mistake, and how much was is spin.

J.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/chinook/attachments/20030825/f13995db/attachment.htm>