Court rules against Yup ’'ik as an historically written language ...

[Susan Penfield]

Thanks for this -- the context does help. However, the notion of
'historically unwritten" is still troubling to me.
Hasn't Yup'ik been written use since the late 1800's? ( I'm told that is
when the church-based orthography
came into use).

S.

On Thu, Jul 24, 2008 at 1:32 AM, William J Poser <wjposer at ldc.upenn.edu>
wrote:

> I have posted my thoughts on the ruling, with links to the ruling
> and other documents, on Language Log:
> http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=396
>
> In context I don't think that the ruling is as outrageous as it
> sounds.
>
> Bill
>



-- 
____________________________________________________________
Susan D. Penfield, Ph.D.

Department of English (Primary)
American Indian Language Development Institute (AILDI)
Second Language Acquisition & Teaching Ph.D. Program (SLAT)
Department of Language,Reading and Culture(LRC)
Department of Linguistics
The Southwest Center (Research)
Phone for messages: (520) 621-1836


"Every language is an old-growth forest of the mind, a watershed of thought,
an ecosystem of spiritual possibilities."

Wade Davis...(on a Starbucks cup...)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/ilat/attachments/20080724/e52f1e4f/attachment.htm>