graphemes

[John Sullivan, Ph.D.]

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



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/nahuat-l/attachments/20090422/939d53f7/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
Nahuatl mailing list
Nahuatl at lists.famsi.org
http://www.famsi.org/mailman/listinfo/nahuatl