Re: Reduced Vai Repertoire

At 20:54 -0400 2005-08-22, Peter T. Daniels wrote:

> > >> I have devised a QWERTY-based Vai keyboard which
>> >> seems to work very well. A non-QWERTY-based Vai
>> >
>> >Seems to whom? How many Vai people with computers have checked it out?
>>
>> It seems to me to work very well, in that with
>> it, I am able to type Vai text accurately with it
>> without much effort or difficult. I am developing
>> this software, and Vai isn't formally encoded
>> yet, and so no one else has "checked it out" yet.
>
>So you haven't asked a single Vai-writer whether they would prefer a
>keyboard with 294 keys to one with 48 (scil. 47 -- where do they stick
>the extra one?).

No, I haven't. My work isn't blithely
theoretical. Vai users are going to buy the same
PCs and Macs as anyone else. They are going to
buy laptops from Dell, Toshiba, Sony, Apple,
whatever. There are only 105,000 Vai speakers.
Why should they be marginalized by development of
a keyboard driver intended for use with a
keyboard that doesn't exist and that no one is
going to build.

A 48-key keyboard has a key (with §/±) to the
left of the 1 key and also has a key (with `/~)
to the left of the z key.

> > I say that a QWERTY-based keyboard for syllabic
>> input (where s + a = sa) will enable Vai users to
>> type all 294 Vai characters plus all the digits
>> plus all the ASCII punctuation (needed for URLs
>> and internet access) plus typographic punctuation
>> (like smart quotes) on the hardware which they
>> *will* be using, that is, US/UK QWERTY-engraved
>> 47- or 48-key keyboards. Into the bargain, the
>
>And I say that new hardware would be far, far preferable.

It's a jolly good thing for the Vai that I'm
developing a specification which they will be
able to use, then.

> > Vais live in an English-speaking country, and any
>> Vai who uses a computer will already be literate
>> in English, or will have to become so if he or
>> she wishes to use any software in the foreseeable
>> future. (One would like to see basic software
>> like Firefox localized into Vai, but it would be
>> unrealistic to hope that much more will ever be
>> localized and maintained for this market.)
>
>Ethnologue lists 69,000 English-speakers (1993) out of 3.4 million
>(1989), or 2%, and literacy of 25% for the country.

Ethnologue (15th edition, 2005) says:

"89,500 in Liberia (1991 L. Vanderaa CRC).
Population total all countries: 105,000. [...]
Language use: 20% use English, 10% mende, 5% Gola
as second language. Language Development:
Literacy rate in second language 10%."

What I said remains true: English is the official
language of Liberia, and Vais who use computers
will encounter it and the Latin alphabet. Indeed,
they must already, as surely road signs are
written in Latin. And computer hardware keyboards
they use will be engraved with QWERTY.

> > I haven't said this. I have taken pains to point
>> out to you that I devised *both* QWERTY and
>> non-QWERTY keyboard layouts for both Cherokee and
>> Inuktitut, and that I recognize that there are
>> Cherokees and Inuit who have first learned to
>> type English and by whom QWERTY is considered
>> easier to learn than another layout.
>
>You're still talking about "keyboard layouts" for the 47 (or 48)-key
>keyboard, right?

Yes, I am. That is the hardware which is
available for them to buy, and it is the hardware
for which keyboards must be developed.

> > What I was pointing out was that the shift state
>> was used in India long ago, by Indians, and was
>> not a quirk imposed upon India.
>
>Right. Shift was independently invented in India. For scripts that have
>nothing like the case-relation of the European alphabets.

I doubt they re-invented the typewriter.
Typewriters used the shift-state, and the Indians
made use of that facility for something that
wasn't case.

> > >> Façade, naïve, résumé. All English words
> > >> correctly spelled with diacritical marks.
>
>> >All those words are correctly spelled without the diacritics.
> >
>> Not in good typography, they aren't. Consult
>> Bringhurst or any other work on good typography.
>
>Orthography is not determined by typographers; it is registered by
>lexicographers.

Yes, and lots of lexicographers, informed by good
typography and tradition, prefer façade, naïve,
résumé to facade. Do what thou wilt.

> > And Irish typists do not feel imposed upon by
> > having to type Shift-Option for ÁÉÍÓÚ. (I repeat
> > this because it refuted your point that
>> "Shift-Option is an immense imposition on the
>> typist".)
>
>Show me drills for typing "Shift-Option-A" in typing manuals.

Show me the typing manual that specifies Option-e Shift-A for Á!

Since 1990 computers have used shift-option for
the acute-accented vowels in Ireland. Creid nó ná
creid.

>What does Option-e Shift-A produce with that keyboard? S-O-Vowel gives Å
>´ ˆ Ø ¨ on a standard Mac.

Option-e produces é. Option-k + a = å, Option-k +
A = Å, Option-k + o = ø, Option-k + O = Ø
(mnemonic: sKandinavian). A full specification
and comparision with the US keyboard can be found
at
http://www.evertype.com/celtscript/ga-keys-x.html
-- and the Irish specification for a QWERTY-based
Ogham keyboard (for both 48-key and 47-key
computers!) can be found at
http://www.evertype.com/celtscript/ogham-keys.html
--
Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com