Government language study released (fwd)

[MiaKalish@LFP]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Rolland Nadjiwon" <mikinakn at SHAW.CA>
To: <ILAT at LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU>
Sent: Saturday, December 18, 2004 12:53 AM
Subject: Re: Government language study released (fwd)


> What if you are working with a language that has no(your last paragraph)
> pronouns, genderization, binarism or linearity(time/history)...do you
invent
> them?

shouldn't. The world's languages are not based on "English". . . or PIE
(Proto-Indo-European, either, for that matter)

>
> If the language, or anything of the 'other' for that matter, is reinvented
> to fit the structure is this not somewhat of a 'Cinderella Syndrome' --
the
> stepsisters distorted contortions to fit their gross feet into the glass
> slipper.
see my comments on Powell.


>
> Further, 'tribal politics' is not an obstacle it is a process, an
'obstacle'
> perhaps to externalized retrofitting retrofitters.
>
> Obviously, there is so much more to this.
I came here from the East, where to my feeble perceptions, people treat each
other equitably, and with respect. I wasn't prepared for the historical
passive-agressive smash and bash games people play here. So. . . one day . .
. considering my pain in a hour of navel-gazing, I realized that I wanted to
be treated with respect, There was no reason for people to treat me badly
simply because I had worked so hard, studied, learned, perfected few things.
I also realized that if I wanted respect, I was going to have to take action
that said, No, I am not going to put up with you treating me like this while
I continue to HOPE that one day you will treat me decently.

So I voted. With my feet.

And you know, people were surprised. They were surprised that I was unhappy
and that I did something about it besides talking and hoping.

I was surprised that they were surprised. I thought they were doing what
they were doing consciously, and on purpose, all along.

It was the Kline bottle of social relations.


>
> -------
> wahjeh
> rolland nadjiwon
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Sean M. Burke" <sburke at CPAN.ORG>
> To: <ILAT at LISTSERV.ARIZONA.EDU>
> Sent: Friday, December 17, 2004 8:10 PM
> Subject: Re: Government language study released (fwd)
>
>
> > At 06:46 PM 2004-12-15, MiaKalish at LFP wrote:
> >> > How well did they test on learning grammatical formations, and other
> >> > non-lexical things?
> >>We didn't get that far. This was for basic lexical acquisition, without
> >>using Any English.  We thought the success of our first project would
> >>excite others, and we would have the chance to develop the Flash movies
> >>for teaching grammar dynamically[...]
> >
> > Yes, the problem of tribal politics is always a massive obstacle in any
> > language revitalization program.  I think the best solution is to have
on
> > your side not just your ample enthusiasm for technologies that you feel
> > can
> > be promising, but also clear documentation of past experiments showing
the
> > technologies to be brilliantly useful for the task you're proposing --
> > demonstrating this with an experimental group and a control group, and
> > going past just lexical retention.  Having experimental results in hand
is
> > what can put you head and shoulders over the other dog-and-pony shows
> > that're out there in the realm of language technology.
> >
> > I mean, anybody can learn a few dozen nouns in an Apachean language --
but
> > it's trying to go from "he runs" to "I ran" or "he ran around" that
trips
> > up all the learners.  Find a technology that helps with that more than
> > /just/ chalk-and-talk does, and show proof of how and when your new tech
> > is
> > effective, and you'll be practically immune to the hassles of tribal
> > politics.
> >
> > --
> > Sean M. Burke    http://search.cpan.org/~sburke/
> >
>
>