VS: continue: Glaring Mistake in nomenclature

From: Erkki I Kolehmainen <eik_at_iki.fi>
Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2011 10:37:53 +0300

Dear Mr. Delex,

Please, please spare us from further details in support of your crusade. You should finally accept the fact that the official block name cannot be changed, the rest is effectively OT.

Thank you!

Erkki I. Kolehmainen

-----Alkuperäinen viesti-----
Lähettäjä: unicode-bounce_at_unicode.org [mailto:unicode-bounce_at_unicode.org] Puolesta delex r
Lähetetty: 14. syyskuuta 2011 9:56
Vastaanottaja: unicode_at_unicode.org
Aihe: continue: Glaring Mistake in nomenclature

>They were separate. Annex A of ISCII 1991 shows Bengali ("BNG") and
>Assamese ("ASM") in
>separate columns. *Every* character in those two columns is >completely
>identical, except the
>entries (no surprise) in the "r" row and the "v" row. And in >Annex D,
>the listing of Inscript keyboards,
>there is one keyboard overlay for Bengali and one for >Assamese. These
>again are completely
>identical, except for the "B" key (where the "v" goes) and >the "J" key
>(where the "r") goes.

>Why? Well, I presume the Bureau of Indian Standards ran into >the same
>linguistic political
>buzzsaw that you have seen rehearsed on this thread.

Well Thanx Ken for you at least bothered to go through the original ISCII script list probably published in 1991. I was very young then. You could also recognise the point of differences. Now have you noticed that in the BNG script there are two nos of 09B0 ( as per Unicode codification) Is it possible that same letter occurs two times in a script ( or alphabet list) ( Well some people have understood that I am not a language expert; Well am not. Therefore there may be some errors in my writings mixing up script, alphabet, letters etc etc. Plz bear with me , I hope you understand my sense at that time and don’t go technically). I am not going into the technical matters of coding characters . My point , I hope many of you understood, was regarding naming the script in Unicode ( well ISO also ) as “Bengali” instead of “ Assamese”. Naming the Script as “Assamese” should be more appropriate so is to include the unique Assamese characters 09F0 and 09F1 which the Be!
 ngali alphabet list can’t claim as theirs.( If they have claimed so at some point of time earlier , then their claim should have been scrutinised and rejected. I wonder whether any native Assamese was there in such selection or voting situation) . “ Linguistic politics” as you have worked out , was definitely there. There was indeed a situation like imposing German in French here also during British Rule in India. I hope I will give links to you shortly to go into the details of that story. The “Dark age of Assamese language” ran for about 37 years in this region when it was tried to kill a the language by vested interests with the help of British Political powers imposing Bengali as medium of instruction in school and colleges and for all official purpose. But even then the Assamese re bounced and there echoed “ Viva La Assamese”.
I think now naming the script as “ Bengali” that too by stealing two unique letters from the Assamese alphabet list and coloring them with Bengali hue is part of that notorious linguistic invasion.
For someone who call me fanatic, well he may call me lunatic as well. For them I can only say that “ Someone can be awakened up only if he is asleep, but not if he is pretending to be asleep ; so keep sleeping (??) tight”
Received on Wed Sep 14 2011 - 02:41:51 CDT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Wed Sep 14 2011 - 02:41:52 CDT