[Lexicog] RE: Query re keyboard re-mapping

[Koontz John E]

On Fri, 24 Sep 2004, Peter Kirk wrote:
> >Of course, computerized work with the Siouan languages goes back to a
> >point when Unicode didn't exist, and Unicode's failure to date to become a
> >practical solution for these languages hasn't unduely harmed either work
> >on these languages or Unicode. ...
>
> Don't blame Unicode, blame Microsoft and the other software companies
> for their tardiness in implementing Unicode.

I don't really blame the Unicode folks for this, really.  I just want to
make it clear why I still take a non-Unicode approach to solving some
problems, even though the Unicode approach, taken in the abstract, is
clearly better.

I don't really even want to blame Microsoft for this.  There's clearly no
economic motivation for supporting exotic minority languages.  Fortunately
Unicode is attractive because it handles the needs of big blocks of major
language customers, so gradually we seem to be getting there.  I wouldn't
have thought it possible a few years ago.

> Thanks for your remarks about the politics of this - an area of which I
> am woefully ignorant.

I certainly can't claim to have a full understanding of the subject
myself, but I think I've at least presented the conventional wisdom on the
subject.

> I see your point. Well, obviously not all people want to use diacritics.
> But if those who want to get together and pressure Microsoft, or just
> pressure Microsoft individually, they might get somewhere. And if no one
> wants to use diacritics, what is the problem?

I explained the problems with unified or even joint action.  In essence,
pressure group tactics really don't seem to be either a reasonable or a
possible answer, given the cultural and political situation.

Apart from that, in many cases the main users of diacritics and even
writing systems are the linguists, of course.  Many of the languages are
fairly moribund as spoken languages.  Linguists naturally think of
committing what exists to print to preserve it, and now also think in
terms of printed grammars, texts, dictionaries, etc., as tools for
training people to access this preserved material, and even, hopefully, of
building up the body of speakers and bringing things back from the brink.
But the classroom approach to instruction is in itself somewhat alien to
many Native American communities, where a sort of lifelong apprenticeship
is a more common approach.  The alienity of the classroom and writing
based instructiona approach is especially marked, since the only potential
teachers are often fairly elderly and traditional folks who wouldn't care
to spend four or five years getting degrees in generalized language
instruction, even if the time, the programs or the money were available.

Proposing any writing system at all as a solution to Native American
language moribundity may look, hypothetically, from the Native American
side, like non-Irish outsiders arriving in Ireland and proposing to save
Irish by teaching everyone to record it in cross-stiching on wall
hangings, or perhaps to send it from place to place with talking drums.
The bemused benificiaries vary from vehemently opposed to kindly
encouraging, but all are probably wondering how the linguists do come up
with these ideas.

Mind you, I'm a proponent of the linguist or crochet & drums approach
myself.  I actually think that writing is the way to go, that it isn't a
waste of time, and that classroom instruction to the extent it is possible
will help.  New times, new ways.  I'm just trying to imagine what it looks
like from the other side.

The Ponca term for diacritics is wagthishka 'bug(s)'.  I think that
includes things like edh and gamma as well - or all undesirable additions
to the real alphabet.  It's a bit disconcerting, since as a linguist I
find diacritics and special characters both natural and useful, and I'm
aware of many major languages which use them in their orthographies.
However, I believe that most English speakers who are not linguists have
something of a phobia about such things, or at least a tendency to treat
them as invisible, and so similar reactions on the part of
English-speaking Native Americans is probably actually rooted in the
adstratum rather than inherent in Native American cultures.

Although there may be some aversion to diacritics and special characters,
there is in many cases no practical way around them.  The practical Omaha
and Ponca orthographies - one language, but two ethnic groups, so two
orthographies - exercise ingenuity to avoid wagthishka.  Nasality is
indicated with raised n, actually an old tradition with Siouan languages.
Gamma is represented with gh, esh and zhee as sh and zh.  It would be
simpler if edh were represented with dh, but since th is the usual Englsh
convention th is used.  To get around the consequent unavailability of
in-line h for marking aspirates, raised h is used, leading to chH (H -
raised h) for aspirated ch.

In the Omaha-Ponca case it is possible to skirt the problem of diacritics
and special characters by using raised characters and digraphs.  However,
for anyone needing to write all of the languages in something like a
consistent usage, e.g., for comparative studies, these schemes that work
for individual languages break down or become very awkward.  Speaking of
awkward, recently spam filters have started rejecting some of the messages
sent to the Siouan list on the grounds that they look like the gibberish
often resorted to by spammers.

In addition, some Siouan langauges are simply written with diacritics and
special characters, e.g., Dakota.  Folks may not like it, but it's the
best that can be achieved.  Tanoan languages are even further into this
territory, though some Tanoan groups fall into the category of groups not
liking to see their language written down - a preference mainly arising
from religious considerations.


------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
Make a clean sweep of pop-up ads. Yahoo! Companion Toolbar.
Now with Pop-Up Blocker. Get it for free!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/L5YrjA/eSIIAA/yQLSAA/HKE4lB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->


Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/lexicographylist/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    lexicographylist-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/