Do we consider… Of two languages, both submitted by identical causes
Download 71.89 Kb.
|
- Navigate this page:
- 92 questions as so many mile-stones on our way toward a common proposal.
| DO WE CONSIDER…
"Of two languages, both submitted by identical causes to the same risks of obsolescence, the one which is endowed with a spelling system is in rule better equipped than the other one to exist" Claude Hagège In: "Halte à la mort des langues" p. 191. 92 questions as so many mile-stones on our way toward a common proposal. I. UNITY OR PLURICITY OF RROMANI 1. Do we consider: A. that Rromani as spoken in Europe is a one and only language, with internal dialectal divisions, B. or that there are in Europe several dozens Rromani languages?
A. that the Rromani dialectal varieties are just juxtaposed to each other, as the stones of a patchwork, without any mutual articulation, B. or that they make up an integrated system in logical relations between them?
A. that Rroms of various dialectal backgrounds have always been in mutual contact and have exchanged beyond dialectal diversity B. or that every single variety of Rromani has to be used only among its original community?
A. that several varieties taken together can form a basis for a common European language B. or that every variety is supposed to develop in total independence of others?
A. that the mainstream of these varieties do form such a common basis and that there are only a small number of varieties (and few speakers) not directly included in it, B. or that only a small number of dialects provide such a basis, leaving most others outside?
A. that the Rromani dialects spoken in the New World present a sort of extension of the European varieties B. or is it a specific independent system?
A. that the Rromani dialectal system is based mainly on specific internal evolutions (sometimes but not always under areal influences) B. or that it is based mainly on the degree of oblivion of the speakers and the number of foreign words introduced in order to compensate a lexical evolution which was not available to Rromani speakers?
A. that a Turk brought up in Sweden and who introduces Swedish words into his Turkish (due to oblivion or lack of adequate vocabulary) has created a new Turkish language/dialect B. or just that he needs to learn the missing Turkish words?
A. that we have to distinguish systematic differences between Rromani dialects (corresponding to isoglosses) and "accidental" differences (mainly in terms of recent loan-words) B. or that all differences as belonging to the same level of disparity, irrelevant of their nature?
A. that a classification of the Rromani dialects has to be established on the basis of systematic isoglosses (mainly of phonological and grammatical character) B. or that any difference between the varieties (including recent loan-words) can be viewed as a relevant feature for classification?
A. that dialects of various origins melt into a common dialect within the borders of a State, since they usually share common recent loan words, whereas a one and only Rromani dialect splits in two dialects when crossed by a State, and language, border B. or do we consider that State borders erected during the two last centuries basically do not account for Rromani dialectology?
A. that among the phonological interdialectal contrasts some make up a consistent system in itself and are therefore relevant for a possible dialectal classification, while others are sporadic and irrelevant to classification (for example trivial changes as stop palatalization before front vowels or aperture changes e>i and o>u) B. or that systematic and sporadic divergences are equally entitled to give a picture of the dialectal structure of Rromani?
A. that the o/e opposition in the 1st person ending of the copula and the past tense of the verbs is the basic feature leading to a first dialectological split among Rromani dialects B. or that other contrasts are relevant for this classification? Which one?
A. that a written language is a mere mirror of the spoken language (somehow like a spoken language was formerly considered as a mirror of thinking) B. or that the oral and the written codes are widely autonomous and have to be therefore treated separately in terms of standardization?
A. that the cognitional processes of language acquisition are the same in oral and written communication B. or that they come under different brain centers?
A. that the cognitional processes of language understanding are the same in oral and written communication B. or that they come under different brain centers?
A. that most sounds of a language are phonetically in continuum (in terms of both articulatory and acoustical phonetics) B. or that they are sharply distinctive units (discrete entities)? 21. Do we consider: A. that the graphemes of a language are in continuum B. or that they are sharply distinctive units (in manuscripts and typed texts)? 22. Do we consider: A. that the channel of understanding a spoken utterance (which is always a natural act) provides an innate and unconscious mechanism of adjustment, converting the sound message (phonetic matter) into a phonemic message (first articulation of the chain) B. or that we understand directly the phonetic substance as such?
A. that the channel of understanding a written text (which is an artificial production) does not provide such a mechanism of adjustment B. or that we understand a written and a spoken text in the same manner?
A. that the features of a spoken text (intonation, gesture, presence of signati, background shared by the interlocutors, commonality of tackled subjects, possibility of questions, feed-back and repetition) remain in written commun-ication B. or that written communication lacks the auxiliary extra-linguistic means of conveying meaning?
A. that written devices of standardization have to foster various remedies aiming at compensating the lack of innate mechanism of adjustment in written (see 23) and the lack of several auxiliary extra-linguistic means of conveying meaning (see 24), B. or that the written form of a language disregard neglect possible additional remedies and just stick to a transcription of the oral message?
26. Do we consider: A. that all languages are unitary and that their written form is identical to their spoken form B. or that they use a common spelling with reading rules in order to render various dialectal, contextual or morphological pronunciations? Examples of reading rules for dialectal variation: German : billig [billik] vs. [billiç] Spanish : Español [español] vs. [ehpañol], [eØpañol] English : to cast [kāst vs. kæst] Examples of reading rules for contextual variation (English): to wake : he wakes [-s] to come : he comes [-z] to lose : he loses [-iz] Examples of reading rules for morphological variation (English): this [ðis] vs. thick [þik] Examples of reading rules for etymological variations (English): girl [gırl] vs. gin [djın] 27. Do we consider (for example): A. that the mutation of the affricate [ʧh] into [ɕ]) is a consistent phenomenon throughout all Rromani dialects (as spoken by good native speakers, not as written by non-Rromani researchers) and therefore can be rendered in script by a common symbol (as it is the case with billig, español and cast) B. or that it is necessary to split the written language through different spellings of a common functional archiphoneme?
30. Do we consider: A. that it is necessary to maintain in script all the discrepancies irrelevant to the Rromani system (not meaning-conveying disparities), but written down only due to their relevance in other languages B. or that we should maintain a common written form of locally divergent pronunciation and disregard irrelevant (and therefore meaningless, useless) differences? 31. What are the advantages and disadvantages of maintaining a common spelling all over Europe? 32. What are the advantages and disadvantages of using many spellings all over Europe, based on local majority language phonemic systems, and rendering in script differently in every country the same functional archiphoneme? 33. If speakers of a concrete dialect agree with the introduction of reading rules to render local variations in their area, do we consider: A. that neighboring dialects present always a unity which justifies stopping convergence in written at that local stage B. or that kin dialects are in use all over Europe and the movement should be taken on account at a larger scale?
A. that if my local set of reading rules satisfies my needs within my State, I am not interested in the way the speakers of my own dialect, my cousins, write their language across the frontier in a different majority environment B. or that we need a common spelling to communicate with my cousins in our native dialect?
A. that if my local set of reading rules satisfies my needs at a regional level (for example the various pronunciations of the masc. dative ending of nouns in the Balkan), I have to disregard reading rules satisfying the need of other Rroms in other areas of Europe (for example the specific pronunciations of the masc. ablative ending of nouns in Russia and Finland) B. or that I have to learn a few minutes the spelling which arose from the analysis of other Rroms' specificity, in order to ensure that their dialect is respected as well as mine?
A. that "the children of my village are interested in the way how other Rroms speak in Europe" B. or that it is good for these children to acquire a reading knowledge allowing them discover the treasures created by other Rroms' mind all over Europe (and the World) and in all evidenced times.
A. that there is no other alternative than a unique linguistic rigid standard or a series of separated standard B. or that convergence can be more or less insisting depending on the domain and kind of communication (less insisting in traditional vocabulary and more insisting in new terminology, less insisting in literature, especially poetry, and more insisting in school books of history or human rights education, less insisting in pronunciation and morphology and more insisting in the case of incomprehensible loan-translations etc…).
A. for a strongly unified Rromani language all over Europe and a unique pronunciation for everybody (as in Polish, French, Hungarian), disregarding the specificity of every dialectal pronunciation B. or for a common spelling which allows every Rromani speaker pronouncing according to his own dialect, while maintaining a common written form able to bridge the gaps created by noting discrepancies irrelevant to the Rromani system, but written down only due to their relevance in other languages?
A. that we have to delete a phonemic opposition every time it is lost in a local variety of Rromani (aspiration in German countries [kana/khana], nature of sibilants in Hungary [ś in śov and ś in ćhon], simplification of 3 in Sofia to ź, nature of affricates in southern Serbia [Serbian ć and č, Albanian q and ç, similar in Rromani], nature of the lateral r [ćorimos vs. ćorrimos], confusion between rr and g and netween b and v [in Latin America : pagudab], ś and s in Finland etc…) and reduce the Rromani system to some 12 or 14 letters, ignoring relevant oppositions B. or that it is advisable to restore these oppositions wherever they have been lost in order to maintain its efficiency and avoid homonymy.
A. that Rroms of various countries are not able to learn at school a spelling different of the spelling of the majority language (while they have to do so when learning English) B. or that Rromani children are mentally equal to the children of other minorities who learn their own alphabet when their language is integrated in school curricula?
A. that a miracle occurred in Romania where 16.000 Rromani children per year learn a specific Rromani spelling and as a result have a gateway access to literature, history, oral heritage not only from their country but also from other countries B. or that Rromani teachers of Romania have evidenced while teaching their mother tongue a real love for it, as a mean of culture and communication?
A. that languages spoken by 30, 100 or 200 times less people than Rromani (Maltese, Welsh, Faroian, German of Liechtenstein and even Sáme with 9 keyboards for less than 40.000 speakers) have their own system in Microsoft office, while Rromani has troubles in writing all over Europe B. or should be we consider that there is a lack of mobilization on our behalf and a lack of support by authorities?
A. that we should keep on adapting the spelling of Rromani to the majority language keyboards of our type-writers and computers, different in all countries (although they have Rromani resources) B. or that we can learn in a few minutes how to use the existing resources right now and apply for a more ergonomic system in the electronic devices – instead of criticizing in general terms the contribution of people who have gone through the whole reflection and has suggested some proposals?
A. that we live in separated countries where most of our contacts begin and end at the city market and that our local knowledge is sufficient to our happiness B. or that we have Europe-wide activities and contact, through tourism, job exchanges, the internet, books, periodicals and movies, etc… ?
A. that Rromani will survive if it is not intensively included in these Europe- or World-wide activities B. or that those activities which include a strong human (not technical or bureaucratic) element have to be available as well in Rromani as in other languages in order to make the choice possible between Rromani and another language?
A. that Rromani was, is or has to become a series of local cants spoken only among small groups of people B. or that its vocation is to be (or rather to remain) a trans-European tool of communication and culture sharing?
A. that family transmission will always maintain Rromani vivid, irrespectively of its ability to function in our societies, just because language transmission in family has always proved efficient, without any encouragement or support of any kind, just because it is a natural eternal process B. or that it is vulnerable in the western society which has brought competition not only among people but also among languages – and therefore needs specific language policy.
A. that parents are guilty when they consider the Rromani variety they speak rather as a burden than a value for their children, due to its lack of adaptability to modern society B. or that the Rromani intelligentsia has missed its mission of promoting the real vocation of Rromani, namely not to express worse what is already well expressed by majority languages (administration, technical subjects, fashion, economy and finance, consumption goods etc…) but to communicate emotions, wisdom, non-material aspirations, poetry, Human Rights and politics seen from the Rromani point of view (not a bureaucratic one) etc…
A. that Rromani can survive only by school teaching, without a wide use among family members B. or that an everyday intensive use of Rromani, on an equal basis with majority languages, has to be granted by the parents.
A. that the parent can provide this everyday intensive use of Rromani if they are not convinced themselves that it has a nonpareil value B. or should we have first to teach the parents that the urban middle-class western technocratic society is not the utmost ideal of life for everybody and that the Rromani cultural heritage bears a wonderful alternative to this very short-sighted society (which has failed in many respects).
A. that it is possible to promote Rromani as a language on an equal foot with other languages but in an isolated way from others B. or that we need to urge the governments organize a wide campaign to restore respect toward all minority languages, with TV spots, targeted school programs (not on minority languages as such but about their value), mentions in various TV programs, wide bilingual or multilingual activities, movies, humor etc.
A. that such pressure upon governments will be possible only through Rromani isolated lobby B. or that we need to coordinate our efforts with other minorities, who happen to have useful experience, in order to bring effective results.
A. that Rromani will gain its position among majority languages through imitation of their linguistic patterns, imitating them in every single country in a different way B. or that it is needed to develop the internal treasures of Rromani not in only linguistic but most of all cultural and spiritual terms in order to propose a real and valuable "pack" to the youth, including wisdom, humor, experience, patǐv, culture, creativity, originality etc…?
A. that it is possible to educate bilingual and bicultural children in unicultural societies B. or that one has to break uniculturalism in order to allow the full existence of other (minority) languages and therefore that a strong and widely shared political will is a necessary prerequisite to any minority policy?
A. that parents and children might yearn for those spiritual goods if they are not even aware of their true worth and accessibility B. or that we have to build a complex system of promotion of Rromani history, culture, creativity, contribution to Europe building, great Rroms in the past, struggle against social perversions (like racism, delinquency, corruption, lack of human and family feelings, sick careerism etc…)?
A. that Rromani has to remain a marginal language in tomorrow's Europe B. or that it has to become one of the main languages of Europe, due to the fact that it conveys a rich and original culture, heritage of a population more numerous than many European peoples, majorities and minorities in their country?
A. that Rroms from countries where Rromani has been lost (Spain, British Isles etc.) have a right to reacquire their patrimonial language B. or that Rromani can be transmitted only among families where there was no interruption in transmission?
A. that since these Rroms have the right to reacquire their language – and if there are many local standards, patterned after the local majority language, they will have to pick a specific local form B. or that they should rather learn a prototypic form, which will be close to both the dialect of their ancestors and the common language as promoted by the IRU group?
A. that when a Rromani inherited word has been forgotten by a group of Rroms and replaced by a loan-word, there is no point to teach this Rromani word to the children during their Rromani classes and that it should be banished for ever from this variety of Rromani B. or that it is good to teach the pupils such words, their history, the reason why they have been eliminated from their regular use (when known) and their connotations?
A. that it is possible and advisable to circulate for wide use all the partly forgotten Rromani words through teaching (as all other languages have done in order to enrich their vocabulary) B. or that we should eliminate from the wide use all words which are not known by all Rromani speakers?
A. that it is possible and advisable to encourage derivation in order to widen the lexical stock of Rromani (as all other languages have done in order to enrich their vocabulary) B. or that we should forbid any enlargement by derivation of the Rromani vocabulary as contrary to the purity of the language?
62. Do we consider: A. that it is possible and advisable to integrate into the Rromani vocabulary useful loan-words already in use in Rromani, every time they bring a value (in terms of accuracy, connotation etc.) B. or that we should forbid any enlargement by borrowing into the Rromani vocabulary as contrary to the purity of the language? 63. Do we consider: A. that it is possible and advisable to borrow from other languages terms which are specific to the culture, history, country etc… of their speakers – including European historical notions and vocabulary B. or that we should forbid any enlargement by borrowing into the Rromani vocabulary as contrary to the purity of the language?
A. that the main problem in lexical enlargement is related to the words themselves which are "missing" in Rromani B. or that the problem is also (or mainly) linked to the lack of knowledge among some Rroms about the notions themselves as expressed by these words.
A. that it is absolutely indispensable to have all the kinds of terminology available in Rromani (including heraldic, tropical entomology, Greek and Latin grammars, kinds of meals, cosmetics, antiquity craftsmanship etc…) with genuine Rromani words B. or that it is possible to use internationalisms for this purpose.
A. that when the various dialects of Rromani have each their own genuine Rromani word, it is good to use them in their native dialect but to teach every pupil the existence and meaning of the word in use in other dialects in order to facilitate understanding B. or that any word of any dialect can be used freely in all linguistic varieties of Rromani?
A. that if a word is "missing" in a Rromani dialect, the speakers are entitled to borrow it from the dialects where it does exist B. or that any speaker is condemned to avoid other dialects' words even if he has no counterpart in his mother tongue?
A. that in the cases where majority languages have different words for similar signati and in domain where accuracy prevails on emotional connotations (like Constitution, Ustav, Kushtetutë, författning (konstitution), σύνταγμα, Alkotmány, Staatsverfassung etc…) it is possible and advisable to propose as an alternative a Latin-based internationalism (of the Konstitùcia type) and/or to coin a specific Rromani word on the basis of Rromani stems (of the Thamidarrin type) B. or that every speaker should use exclusively the word of the majority language of his country? Same for Embassy, ambassade, πρεσβεία, посолство, nagykövetség, Botschaft etc… 69. Do we consider: A. that the lexical issue is not uniquely lexical, but that in many cases, even if there is no accurate word to render the majority language notion, Rromani has various means of expressing this notion (comparison, description, analytic approach etc…) B. or that if we translate word for word all the dictionary of majority languages, we will obtain a fully vivid and fully Rromani Rromani language.
A. that words and grammatical structures existing in Rromani without their counterpart or the notion they express existing in majority languages are valuable parts of the Rromani heritage B. or that such items are of no use in modern society and need only be forgotten by speakers.
A. that in certain cases, words existing in majority language and not in Rromani express useless notion and that there is no point to endeavor creating or finding them at all costs B. or that we need to have a Rromani counterpart to any single lexical item of majority language vocabulary.
A. that if Rromani vocabulary does not distinguish concrete notions (due to the influence of languages which themselves do not distinguish), for example using kaśt for both "wood" and "tree" (cf. common Rromani kaśt "wood" and rukh "tree") or vast for both "arm" and "hand" (cf. common Rromani musi "arm" and vast "hand"), we should consider that this ignorance is a cultural heritage and that standard Rromani has to mirror this heritage B. or that such confusions are due to the influence of foreign language, which restricted the Rromani lexical fund and that it has to be restored as initially existing through teaching and literature.
A. that if Rromani vocabulary does not distinguish important notions (due to a long sojourn in backward rural countries), for example using korro for all the meanings "blind", "short-sighted", "spectacles-wearer" etc… or Xoraxaj for both "Muslim" and "Turk", we should consider that this ignorance is a cultural heritage and that standard Rromani has to mirror this heritage B. or that the initial vocabulary has to be restored as above.
A. that if we deprive Rromani of the old genuine vocabulary when partly forgotten and of the possibilities of enrichment through derivation, borrowing and semantic shift of lexemes, it will not meet the needs of communication and cultural creation either in terms of Rromani traditional values or of modern society and therefore its speakers will desert it and of course not pass it over to their children, leading to linguistic death B. or that in spite of these deficiencies it will survive.
A. that variations between linguistic registers and even code-switching between languages for the sake of humor indicates language poverty B. or that this is a rather positive phenomenon?
A. that the forcible use of Rromani language in some situations and of another language in other situations, due to the lack of linguistic resources in one of the two, indicates language poverty B. or that this is a rather positive phenomenon of common life?
A. that Rromani has to compete in all fields with majority languages B. or that there should be flexible complementarity between the languages in use in a defined area (State or region)?
A. that Rromani is Rromani only in so far any foreign word is banished B. or that a circulation of foreign word into, and out of, Rromani is healthy (in so far Rromani retains its full ability of expression if needed)?
A. that we should start anew thinking of status planning for Rromani, although a lot has already been done on language planning, as well from a theoretical as a practical point of view B. or that further discussions are still necessary about abstract language planning?
A. that it is time to judge the tree after its fruit and rather help each other to solve existing problems, including through positive criticism, point by point, and with solid argumentation, of what has been produced until now B. or that we have to continue general, abstract and not argued accusations, jeopardizing this way any chance for Rromani to restore its European position?
A. that indeed a lot has been done in terms of Europe-wide production, in spite of lack of financial support, lack of coordination, lack of access to information, but also in spite of slanders and fabrications against the very idea that rromani is one language B. or that we should do as a certain disappointed and bitter Irishman, showing a 40 page pamphlet reporting "scientifically" that the Rroms do not want anymore to speak Rromani except for a few street greetings and therefore refusing the idea that Rromani could be regarded as a modern European language – in spite of the kilograms of publications donated to his office?
A. that we can deny that a standard has met its intention when there are dozens of publications printed in all domains of life in this standard, in spite of the lack of access to correct advertisement and distribution B. or should we consider that these dozens of publications are just an exercise in futility done by insane people?
A. that a spelling should be evaluated as successful in so far it has produced more printed material than all other attempts together B. or should we maintain that all spellings are equal, irrespectively if they have been used in one single local pamphlet or in one hundred books readable by speakers of Rroms from any place of the world?
A. that we should first of all elaborate a complex terminology of Rromani in all domains of life B. or first gather and circulate a basic vocabulary of a few thousand words for everyday needs?
A. that the natural human fear of learning new things is an insurmountable obstacle for Rroms to learn (in two hours) a system of spelling appropriate for their language, wide communication and respect of dialectal varieties B. or should we feel that, since this fear is overcome (one way or another) for all other subjects in school (including the learning of majority language spelling), it can be overcome as well when the preservation of Rromani is at stake?
A. that if the family kernel and neighborhood space is indeed bilingual and bicultural we have real chances of developing Rromani and that therefore we have first to convince parents and grand-parents to speak Rromani as often as possible at home B. or that laws and school programs will be sufficient for the maintenance of our language?
A. that parents and grand-parents will speak Rromani with their kids if there is no sign of public respect for this language and prestige for its heritage B. or that we can expect that one day all families will switch to Rromani just because they will understand they have to love their mother-tongue?
A. that we can achieve public respect and prestige without good quality visibility and empowerment of Rroms in city life B. or that a simple declaration of "linguistic rights" is sufficient to convince families and neighbors to start again speaking Rromani among them?
A. that good quality visibility will be achieved by common intensive work in key domains of modern life (@-communication, revival of traditional Rromani wisdom, entertainment, environmental issues, religious life, movies, etc…) and that it is necessary for this purpose to unite and strengthen our efforts B. or that it will appear one day by itself?
A. that it is wiser to play the game of people attempted to destroy Rromani identity, through attacks against its strongest exponent – language (they are the same who attack all researches evidencing the high level of traditional Rromani culture) B. or that it is wiser to disregard their attempts of seduction and work for the sake of the common good of the Rromani people?
A. that a dry decision about language standardization, status and programs will unite the Rroms and convince them cultivate Rromani and transmit it to their children B. or that we have to be creative and promote the IDEA that Rromani language, culture and creation are nonpareil creations of the human spirit and that as such it is a right, a duty and a honor to promote them?
A. that we have to pose further questions in this series B. or that we should rather turn to concrete work? Directory: docs docs -> Application for acem docs -> Observational Assessment of Teaching Practices Teaching Assessment Initiative Proposal Submitted to The Teachers for a New Era project docs -> Traditional British values docs -> From Warfighters to Crimefighters: The Origins of Domestic Police Militarization docs -> Borzoi Club of America Register of Merit Program I. What is a Register Of Merit docs -> Protecting the rights of the child in the context of migration docs -> United Nations E/C. 12/Esp/5 docs -> 9th May 1950 the schuman declaration docs -> Getting To Outcomes® in Services for Homeless Veterans 10 Steps for Achieving Accountability Download 71.89 Kb. Share with your friends:
|