Word splitting & hyphenation conventions in roman transliteration

[U. Hayavadana]

At 14:16 19.02.99 -1000, Raja wrote:
>On Fri, 19 Feb 1999, U. Hayavadana wrote:
>
>> At 13:17 18.02.99 -1000, Raja wrote:
>It is for *you* to show
>that introducing a new "rOman skript"
>controversy in India will result in
>the accelerated spread of literacy.

what a demagogue you are. i never said i wanted to introduce a
controversy, and i don't need to prove a thing i never suggested. i want
to implement more widely a script that *is already there, in all states
of the union, and that is more widespread in its use than any other*. i
already said so. please read what i write.

>I don't have to prove it.  You do.

i already have given my arguments for *efficiency*. or do you mean by
"proof": an experiment, with real people?

why have the speakers of malay, swahili, javanese, turkish etc. etc. all
dumped their old scripts in favour of roman? is that proof enough? or do
you have another crazy reason why india is different? even idli-eaters
use roman script, in case you have doubts about that: i've seen them do
so. :-)

>Don't just go on talking about fonts.
>India isn't a printing press.  It's
>a real country with real people
>holding strong likes and dislikes.
>So talk about reality.

literacy is linked with book production, with printing presses. this is
reality. much more real than your sentimentality.

>> why are you refusing to see the point?
>
>You din't answer my question.
>Allegedly, this is all about
>literacy.  So answer my question.
>I'll even repeat it for you:  will
>starting a brand new controversy
>in India (about switching to
>rOman skript) accelerate the
>spread of literacy?

*you* are starting a silly controversy, not me. i have already given my
perfectly rational considerations why literacy will go through
*accelerated growth* (*that* is my concern, and i have made that clear
enough) by the adoption of roman script. you have systematically ignored
my arguments and instead have brought in useless, irrelevant stuff --
about idli's and so on, good gracious.

>[...deleted...]
>> using roman is very simply the most efficient, also cost-efficient
means
>> of spreading literacy.  why don't you want that?
>
>Now, now.  You won't get very far
>by claiming that
>opposing rOman skript == opposing literacy.
>That's untrue and we both know it.

twisting my words again? i'm beginning to wonder whether you are really
literate, if you can't read and understand my simple arguments. don't
you have anything better to do than to pick up these silly quarrels,
twisting my words and sabotaging a rational discussion (with talk about
idli's etc.)? if you don't address the real issue (efficiency +
increased spread of literacy), you'll drop out of it completely, whether
i continue this debate or not. it's up to you.

h



______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com