|
|
|
Unseth, P. 1980 |
| Reference | |
Unseth, Peter. 1980. "The consideration of non-Roman orthographies in literacy programs." Notes on Literacy. Interest level: specialist. | |
| Summary | |
|
Cooper states that "alphabets are orthographies which have separate symbols for vowels and consonants, as in English, Spanish, or Russian. Syllabaries are writing systems which have separate symbols for each syllable, such as in Cherokee and the Japanese Hiragana." Discusses the following factors to consider in using non-Roman script for orthographies: | |
| |
|
Dietsch presents article for in-house publication. Examines use of syllabaries and non-Roman alphabets. Establishes criteria for decision making. Believes orthography must first be accurate then examined by sociolinguistics (Venezky). Orthography acts as a bridge to learning a national language. | |
| Evaluation | |
|
Is a good article. Brings out fears and considerations for using non-Roman orthographies. Summary statement about individual choice is not applicable when script is dictated by law as in Thailand. Is sensitive to mother tongue speakers' point of view. Gives clear presentation on practical uses of literacy in the mother tongue. | |
|
Some people do not agree with Venezky's view that accuracy dominates cultural acceptance. Is helpful for those working in areas where a non-Roman script is a feasible option. | |
Context for this page:
Page content last modified: 28 June 1999 |
|
© 1999 SIL International |