From: nexus@matt.ksu.ksu.edu (Abstractor)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.bulgaria
Subject: Re: Anything goes
Date: 18 Nov 1992 22:24:24 -0600
Organization: Kansas State University
NNTP-Posting-Host: matt.ksu.ksu.edu

givanov@eniac.seas.upenn.edu (George Ace Maverick) writes:


>	Are you saying that language can exist independently of the writing
> system. Now, frankly I find this hard to accept.

Maybe he was referring to completely "semiotic" languages, you know,
in the dawn of mankind ... (grunting, yelling and pointing) -:)

>>cultures that have no need of alphabets, and plenty of illiterate people (in
>>Bulgaria and elsewhere) who would disagree with your assertion.
>	I  seriously doubt it. 

Yes, really, why creat script at all? No need to read books as well,
let's support the "vocal" tradition -:) So we can be proud that we
measure on the same scale with the illiterate and alphabetless
cultures.

>>On the other hand, there are written languages (Latin, for one) that belong to>noone and that serve no authentic communicative purpose.  Oral language as a
>>natural phenomenon seems to have primacy over written forms.
>	Maybe it's better for you to share your insights to us. If oral
>language is more "primal" why post articles :)
>	Since I was asked by someone what I meant by the pseudo part..
>Well, frankly I dislike reading someone's ASCII interpretation of Bulgarian. In
>fact that in itself is not too bad, if it wasn't for the incredible
>ways that people do it. Every other person has his own version and every other
>person claims his is the best. That's why the suggestion of translating the
>the articles makes sense (boy what a NET waste). Now, please don't tell me
>that if  you have no idea of the language and you see more than three 
>consonants in a row, you'll feel compelled to learn the language :).
>Either do it right, or don't bother doing it.

Absolutely agreed. Quite frankly, I find TIETZE's "transliterations"
really disgusting and offensife. It is VULGAR to bastardize the latin
fonts supported on Internet in this way. The question is not whether
one should learn English to use the net or not, or if that's a
privillege for English speakers. The core of the "problem" lies rather
in the fact that the net is DESIGNED and MEANT to accept and use latin
fonts and its beauty is in its convenience also. That's the current
state of the matter and every perversion of the supported latin fonts
not only looks ugly but it's very unconvenient and confusing.
Want it or not, the physical carrier of Internet are computer systems
produced, designed and licensed for use in the U.S. of A. Instead of
being emotional and fussy about this fact, one should better learn
how to use the equipment best for what it can do, instead of creating
silly, prophanizing and controversial "transliterations".

And I'm amazed, how narrow-minded people subscribing to this ng are
not to recognize this fact and to speculate with "Maverick"'s post
on politically and culturally biased basis.

Thanks god, there are still few sensible people like Maverick on this
ng.

>Enough said. 
>Please mail me all flames  and comments. 
>Hasta.

I'm in the same team. Feel free to junk or "beautify" my mbox with
English or "TPAHC^|/|TEP|/|PAH" Bulgarian.

--Hands on the flamethrower! Ready! Go!--

-:)