Russell McMahon wrote:

>> ... Could it be that you have a BE-centric viewpoint? :)
> =

> I'd hope so :-). But, more a PV* one, plus a BE** centric keyboard at an
> obvious (to me) level. =


That's just a lazy excuse. I don't know what keyboard you have, but if you
have the '$' character above the 4, it's likely an US-ASCII keyboard. And
if it is, there's (in Windows, which you're using) the "US International"
keyboard layout which permits to easily type all (or almost all) European
letters. Even if not, there's the Alt-<number> way to type extended ASCII
and ANSI characters (which contain all or almost all European characters),
easily available in many of the ASCII tables floating around. I'm sure you
have one near your desktop (virtual or real, probably both). Then there's
of course Microsoft's keyboard layout editor that permits you to configure
your own keyboard layout.

For one who says he cares about the original way to write things, this
should (and could easily) have been resolved many many years ago.


> The same does not explain and is not of the same type of variation as the
> transposition of "re" to "er" in words***.

I'm not sure where you're trying to go with this. Are you trying to say
that "metre" is "more original" than "meter"? As I see it -- rather a
purist on occasion, especially when confronted with a purist type
argumentation :) --, there is no more or less original, there is only
original or not. For a French who cares about French spelling, "metre" is
as wrong as "meter" -- and that (the original correct spelling) is the
reference you seemed to have set. (Without, of course, being aware that
what BE considers original is not original at all, unlike AE, which
appropriately doesn't really care of whether it's original or not. Which
seems to me an attitude that's more realistic than pretending to be the
original when all there is is a lack of recognizing the difference to the
original.)

Besides, here's what seemed to have happened. The French invented the term
le m=E8tre. The English accepted the concept, changed the spelling into
"metre" and changed the pronunciation into something that sounds like
"meter" -- probably because they really don't care about keeping anything
original that isn't original English. Later, the Americans did something
quite similar -- only they brought the spelling closer to the sound. Now
what's the qualitative difference between what the English did and what the
Americans did? (The original butchers are the English, one could argue in
this context, as they butchered the pronunciation, which is the soul of a
word. Unless, of course, they really wanted the "meter" and just spelled it
differently because they thought that was fancier. In which case that
spelling is merely irrelevant.)

(And don't expose again your BE centric viewpoint by saying that changing
an '=E8' into an 'e' is less of a change than changing 'tre' into 'ter' when
it's already pronounced as 'ter'. Of course, from a BE centric viewpoint,
all others are insignificant and lucky to be alive... But then, they
should've given more power to that viewpoint before they lost the war
against the Americans; now it's too late :)


> While my daughter could, no doubt, were it not that she was currently
> about 2000 km away from here,  make her text sing with *** umlauts [...]
> such a feat would require of me more education that happens to have
> happened to date. =


I suggest an online search for "extended ASCII", or -- if you have an ASCII
keyboard --, "US International keyboard". It is not complicated, I promise.
(At the end, I saw that you already found a main element, and from there
you easily find your way into Microsoft's keyboard documentation. If needed
at all.)

> For most purposes my missives are understood at a basic level with the
> accents removed from my characters. =


Ooops... you're slick as a water snake :)  I take it that for most
Englishmen, and even for some stubborn NewZealanders, an AE text (using
meter, spelled, flavor and similar variations) is understood "for most
purposes". I didn't think that this was your original point. So where does
this come from now? Is it about being understood (an, if I may say so,
practical viewpoint and as such more typical American) or is it about
maintaining the original spelling (supposedly the English viewpoint here)?
And is "original" only what is BE (by definition, this is where all things
begin and end), or do you mean by "original" /really/ original (even if the
origin is outside BE -- which happens on occasion, even though it shouldn't
:)?


> A keyboard and/or software system that allows of ease of variation of
> basic characters by people with semi-fixed (in this area at least) brain
> paths would be a blessing.

There are two such "software systems" in widespread use. One is called
Windows and the other Linux (in no particular order). Both allow this
rather easily. =


> When sending emails from Taiwan I have been forced on occasion to use
> Alt-nnn combinations to obtain "English" text or even to cutting and
> pasting letters from other messages. I'm certain that there would have
> been easy ways to convince said PCs that I wanted to actually produce
> the characters shown on the keyboards that I was using, but I could not
> at the time find anyone who could both understand my question and answer
> it.

It's actually rather easy once you have done one look into the Regional and
Language Options control panel, Language tab, Details. I haven't seen a
system configured for Chinese, but I think you don't need to work with
Traditional Chinese as input language if you don't want to.

> I'm aware that discussions like this are unlikely to produce satisfactory
> outcomes when dealing with people who are not aware of the existence of
> Aluminium :-).

Maybe. But I can assure you that having patience with people who are not
aware of the existence of le m=E8tre is a good exercise, and the second step
then (dealing with aluminum) is a lot easier :)

> ** There is ONLY British English. All other forms of xE are impostors.

That's talking like someone with the authority to determine this... It
would all be easier if the world were one Commonwealth under one crown,
wouldn't it? But it ain't... Try to get over it :)  The crown, even though
relevant for New Zealand and a few others, is quite irrelevant outside of
this circle, and so are conclusions derived from its existence.

There are (and always have been) many forms of English (and of German, and
of any other living language, with the possible exception of Esperanto,
which may or may not be considered a living language). The concept of one
correct way of a language is a pipe dream of centralists. The moment you
lose control, the language goes its own way. Why should this be different
in, say, the USA from how it is in New Zealand? (Besides, I don't have the
time, but I'm sure I can find the one or other Englishman who doesn't
consider New Zealandish the real British English.)

There is a line of thought that could consider BE (and all other variations
of English) some pretty bastard children of the original Germanic. In most
if not all other Germanic countries, the correct spelling is "meter". So
who's going astray here?

Even the Wikipedia seems to disagree with you: "English is a pluricentric
language, without a central language authority like France's Acad=E9mie
fran=E7aise; and, although no variety is clearly considered the only
standard, there are a number of accents considered to be more prestigious,
such as Received Pronunciation in Britain."

For them, it's only about prestige, not about correctness. There's even an
entry for New Zealand English, and a few New Zealand English dictionaries.
You're sure you're actually using British English -- or only think you're
using British English, but in reality you're using New Zealand English?


> I imagine that eg "Brazilian Spanish" may be a meaningful concept.

Depends. There is what they call Portu=F1ol in Brazil (the word Portugu=EAs
joined with the word Espa=F1ol), which is what they speak mostly in the
border regions between Brazil (where they speak Brazilian Portuguese) and
the countries around it (where they speak their version of Spanish), or in
areas in Brazil where many tourists e.g. from Argentina are (and vice
versa). But that's probably not what you meant.

Both the Spanish spoken in the Americas and the Portuguese spoken in Brazil
vary from the languages in the original occupying countries. Considering
what the occupiers did, I find it easily understandable that there may even
be a need to distance themselves a bit. (This need may be less pronounced
or even reversed for the ones who still understand themselves as part of
the occupying party, of course.) And of course this independence -- which
may be decried in other parts of the world -- led to an independent
development of the language. Living languages change over time. Languages
are primarily linked to countries or other power structures (crowns etc.)
As soon as the power structure changes, the languages go different ways.
The only way to show that AE has no place in this world would be for the
Commonwealth of Nations to occupy the USA. As long as they are not prepared
to do that, there will be AE. It's as simple as that.


After my first few months in Brazil I could easily carry a fluent
conversation here, and also understand pronouncements at airports etc. But
when I flew home with the TAP (the Portuguese airline), I couldn't
understand a single word spoken by the attendants or the captain (in
Portuguese Portuguese). I'd say it's much more different than AE and BE
are.

> How do you say "Deja vu" in French?

You write "d=E9j=E0 vu", of course... for the purists. ("Say" is another
story...) The others (the realists) should be happy with anything from
aluminum flavours to un-originally spelt amperes... :)

Gerhard

-- =

http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist