--- In qalam@yahoogroups.com, "i18n@..." <i18n@...> wrote:

> suzmccarth wrote:

> OK, maybe I am jsut being dumb here, but then I am asking

for help.

First, I remember your previous comment about equity and
would have to concede that I don't want to accuse people of
being unequitable. This is just the way things have evolved.

>
> If what you say above is true, then wouldn't organizations both

in and

> out of school spring up to meet the need?

But different effects will have to be expected. In the English
speaking world, very few skills have to be acquired to go from
being literate, to being literate on a computer in the basic
functions. Therefore older people can have access to computer
literacy and participate along with younger ones. My
mother-in-law at 80 is an active participant in her internet forum.

The problem with having to learn a new and different type of
orthography is that traditional knowledge will be devalued. Those
who are traditional literates will not be able to participate, even if
they had electricity.

A five year old can do more on a computer in English than an
adult can in another wrting system if they have a
non-glyph-based keyboard.

I saw a scientist do his two finger hunt and peck during a TV
program recently. He didn't want to invest in learning a typing
program...

>
> I look at the variety of opportunities that people have here in my
> region, where there is a wide range of language barriers and

educational

> expectation variations, and see that there is more chance to

keep

> learning even if you don't get it quite right during traditional
> schooling. Especially for practical skills such as reading and

writing

> and typing.
>
> OTOH, it is true that many people fall through the cracks. But

that is a

> societal problem, not one related to the material being taught.
>
> Is it or will it be significantly different in Liberia?

I am not sure we can compare the educational opportunities in
Liberia with NA.

>
> >
> > If we accept that computers will only be accessible for those
> > who read the English alphabet that is one thing. I understand
> > that that is your position, and maybe it is realistic.
> >
> >
> > > QWERTY deadkeys solves the problem smashingly.
> >
> > Deadkeys are hardly intuitive either.
>
> It is a pretty simple concept though, you have to admit.

Especially if

> your past education does not provide you with any other

expectations

> that there should be a on->one correspondence between key

presses and

> "characters".

People's brains appreciate feedback. Plunk, I see it, therefore I
now know what that key does.

About research, I have probably written one of the only papers on
a study about being able to input and search on the computer in
different writing systems. And it is no fun when some children
can google like a flash in their writing system and others cannot
even input one word. In fact, I would never do it again - it was so
frustrating and unhappy really to say no "you have to use a
different system", or "I will type the word for you." OTOH it just
confirmed for them that English was better.

> It seems likely you could navigate without seeing signs at all
> - there are generally other visual or contextual clues as to how

to act

> at any given time or where to turn, which don't involve reading

at all.

What you are describing here is how most children learn to use
the computer and it is a lot faster than reading the menu. It is
called clicking around. Children aren't afraid to just click and see
what happens. The notion that you have to read the directions is
not really part of the game for children.

> I think it would be hard to test for practically speaking, unless it

was

> some sort of complex driving simulator.

Suzanne