Jon,

> "I really have no problem with anyone who wants to learn Burmese
> script and quote Burmese sources in it. But I hope you realize that
> rather few non-Burmese will be able to use your work."

I stand by the above, and I fail to see how the points below respond to it.

> 1. The beauty of modern technology is that script changes should be
> instantaneous and automatic.

Like decipherability, beauty is notoriously subjective. But whether modern technology is
beautiful or not, it doesn't change the situation wrt Pali scripts and their accessibility to
speakers and readers of various languages.

> 2. I would not assume that historically script was always irrelevant.
> Burmese Kamavacca ordination manuscripts in gold lettering go very far
> back and are even referred to in Ssu Ma Chien's history.

No one assumes that. But the historical relevance of a script is distinct from its utility for
writing a language or specific texts. Incidentally, Sima Qian (to shift from one
romanization to another) is usually said to have lived from 146 to 86 BC. He could hardly
have referred to Burmese manuscripts dating at least a millennium later.

> 4. Availability of Pali texts in Burmese script is important for
> Burmese to read them.

Many Pali texts are available in Burmese script, probably more than in romanization, as
you yourself observed.

> 5. Burmese Pali script, as well as other local variants (Lanka, Khom,
> Yuan, Lao, etc) may be also reflect local pronunciation and therefore
> important in the way these texts are memorised.

If so, I would think that this is grounds to replace them with a more accurate script, rather
than cling to them.

> 6. It makes no sense to transliterate Nissaya, an important
> understudied Pali-Burmese literary genre. An example from the first
> page of U Kala's Mahayzawingyi:
>
> http://jonfernquest.googlepages.com/ukalanissaya.jpg

If you want to present work on nissaya texts to a non-Burmese readership, I think you
should romanize your material. If earlier scholars have romanized poorly or
inconsistently, do it better. Preserving the original script will not solve any problems, but
merely avoid them. If the work of Western scholars is difficult for Burmese to understand,
they can easily be translated.

> 7. I have been working with Burmese texts with Pali for 15 years and
> have published several papers. And the one thing that stands out in
> mind is that respect for local culture entails respect for their
> writing system also. It has long been m intention to act on this

I am afraid I am not familiar with the papers you refer to or the format in which they
appeared. But using romanization seems to me no more disrespectful of local culture than
writing the text in English, or having it printed using Western (rather than Burmese) paper
and ink. Or, come to think of it, using a computer rather than wood blocks.

George Bedell