--- In qalam@yahoogroups.com, "suzmccarth" <suzmccarth@...> wrote:

> --- In qalam@yahoogroups.com, "Richard Wordingham"
> <richard.wordingham@...> wrote:
> > --- In qalam@yahoogroups.com, "suzmccarth" <suzmccarth@...> wrote:

> > > They
> > > > look like PR jobs to me:
> > > >
> > > > 'You can't handle a paleface alphabet? OK, try a syllabary.
> > > That's
> > > > the Native American thing!'

> If the French and Italians use a row of syllables to teach literacy
> then why is this a native/paleface issue?

Are the French and Italians told they are learning a syllabary rather
than an alphabet? I think not. (What's become of Marco?) It smacked
to me of being a matter of presentation - factor 4 below. I believe
there are implications for the every day spelling, such as the
omission of final consonants, though they were not omitted in the
account of Potawatomi. Perhaps Buginese and most Philippine babayin
are useful parallels.

In the latter case, there are issues with the virama introduced by a
Spaniard. /i/ and /u/ were represented by horizontal and vertical
dashes, so he drew the virama as a cross. Some see this as a
Christian imposition, and now object to it on those grounds alone. A
later introduction, in a form very similar to a deleting slash through
the plain letter, has had more success amongst those who use of the
system is practical rather than antiquarian or posturing.

> "Willard Walker argued that "acceptance [of a writing system] by the
> target population is contingent on four factors: 1) acceptance of
> the innovators and others associated with the program, 2)
> recognition on the part of the native community that literacy is
> useful enough or fun enough to be worthwhile, 3) the acceptability
> of the content of any literature produced, and 4) the acceptability
> of the writing system" (1969: 149).

Richard.