Re: Re[2]: Errata in language/script list

From: Peter_Constable@sil.org
Date: Mon Jul 30 2001 - 09:50:08 EDT


On 07/27/2001 08:35:18 PM Philipp Reichmuth wrote:

>>> - Ge'ez: Ge'ez is not used anymore except for liturgical purposes, so
>>> I'd consider it a bit problematic to specify a country where it's
>>> spoken. I'd probably remove the "Eritrea, Ethiopia" country
>>> specification.
>
>PD> Ge'ez is also used in comparative Semitic linguistics (primarily by
>PD> biblical and ANE scholars). See Thomas O. Lambdin "Introduction to
>PD> Classical Ethiopic (Ge'ez)", Harvard Semitic Studies, vol. 24,
Scholars
>PD> Press, 1978.
>
>This is right, of course, in so far as Ge'ez is an important language
>within comparative Semitic studies.

Is it not also a liturgical language that is currently used as such?

>However, as far as I understand
>the language list under discussion here, it encompasses languages as
>they are spoken. If this distinction is not made, then the concept of
>the entire list will have to be altered a bit; for example, for
>practically every single language in the list one would have to add
>the script "Latin" because it is most probably being used in some
>Latin transcription or the other within linguistic studies of the
>respective language.

But note that Ge'ez is listed as written with Ethiopic script, not Latin. I
think the list is fine as is. If someone is interested in a language like
Ge'ez, whether for current liturgical purposes or for purposes of
historical or literary research, they may want to work with digital text in
that language, and therefore be interested in knowing whether or not it is
supported by Unicode. This list tells them that is it. I agree that
Romanisations of various scripts is quite another matter, and would involve
a number of changes in this list, but I don't think that's an issue for the
Ge'ez entry.

>In addition, then it makes even less sense to specify countries for
>dead/liturgical/etc. (i.e. not used in everyday conversation)
>languages since most scientific activity in comparative linguistics
>(at least in Semitics) takes place outside of the area of origin of
>the respective language.

Note that the entry for Latin doesn't list a country. On the other hand, it
may make sense to list a country if liturgical usage is predominantly in
certain countries only.

- Peter

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Peter Constable

Non-Roman Script Initiative, SIL International
7500 W. Camp Wisdom Rd., Dallas, TX 75236, USA
Tel: +1 972 708 7485
E-mail: <peter_constable@sil.org>

  



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Mon Jul 30 2001 - 11:26:12 EDT