Cindy, others,
"Again, I want to draw you back to the discussion when
> Dave A. Chakrabarti suggested English, as de factor
> ICT language at present, should be the way we want to
> look at for the rest of the world. "
When did I say this? I resent the implication.
I thought my meaning was fairly clear. Several posts on this subject
have discussed the need for instruction in the vernacular, and the need
*in our sector* for content in the vernacular. I feel that no matter how
ideologically sound these ideas may be, it simply won't happen till
there's an economic incentive to do so.
One organization, or a group of organizations, cannot be the driving
force behind content creation in a particular language. Why are English,
Korean, and Japanese blessed with such masses of content on the
internet? Not because some organization decided to promote the language
online for ideological reasons. It happened because business economics
dictated that it happen. There was a demand, and it was economically
sensible to fill that demand. A Korean blogger writing for a
Korean-speaking audience has no incentive to blog in English.
For some language groups, however, this is simply not the case. I *know*
Indians who are poor, who speak only Bengali, who are desperately in
need of economic mobility...perfect subjects for digital literacy
education, in other words. They would *much* rather learn English than
learn to use the internet in Bengali. As a result, there is greater
economic need for ESL classes than there is for Bengali computer
instruction. In fact, there is greater demand for ESL than there is for
*any* computer instruction in many cases. India chose Hindi to serve as
a national language (narrowly, over English) but there are 23+ major
languages spoken, each with its own dialects. Despite this variety,
English is the language of social and economic mobility...not a vernacular.
You and I can argue all we want these people should learn to communicate
in their native languages. But what we are actually implying, and which
I'll make explicit, is that these people should be able to communicate
in their native languages, both on and offline, with the same degree of
economic meaning as in English. And this is simply not the reality for
many of these language groups. We may wish it were true, we may look for
ways to make it true, we may criticize those who point out its lack of
truth...but in the end, it's *not* something that we have achieved, yet.
When I can honestly say that teaching my family in India to use the
internet in Bengali will be as useful to them as teaching them to use it
in English, then there will be a demand for Bengali content. *Then* we
can advocate for Bengali computer instruction, Bengali email
applications, Bengali keyboarding classes...and a demand for content in
Bengali will follow, as the numbers of people preferring Bengali grows
online.
It's not the number of Bengali speakers online that counts. It's the
number of people preferring Bengali. I'm a Bengali speaker. My presence
doesn't increase the demand for Bengali content in the least.
The languages we use online aren't merely a social experiment. Our
online training has economic, social, and personal implications. To
advise computer education in the vernacular when this prevents the
economic benefit of that same education in English is not something I
can suggest, because there are real people with real lives that are
negatively affected by such a move.
As I said before, one possible solution is bi-lingual education, so we
add the economic advantages of English with the social preference of the
vernacular, always leaving the user free to choose. Given the lack of
content in the vernacular, however, I think this would only result in
users learning to use English content more and more....they'll be like
me, speakers of Bengali but creating no demand for Bengali content online.
If you're going to put words in my mouth, I ask that you read my posts a
little more carefully in the future.
Dave.
-------------------
Dave A. Chakrabarti
Projects Coordinator
CTCNet Chicago
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(708) 919 1026
-------------------
Cindy Lemcke-Hoong wrote:
Hello Dave,
Again, I want to draw you back to the discussion when
Dave A. Chakrabarti suggested English, as de factor
ICT language at present, should be the way we want to
look at for the rest of the world.
I again agreed when you mentioned most of the people
in these poorer countries are illiterate therefore
'cannot read, cannot write'... but I am sure they can
speak and hear/listen (unless of course with physical
disabilities) in their own language??? Would you not
agree the right thing to do to improve their abilitity
of communication to the written/reading world is in
THEIR OWN LANGUAGE? For example, citizens of Bukina
Faso to whom French is a familiar 'sound', therefore
EVEN when they cannot write or read in that language,
BUT would you not think teaching them to read and
write French would be faster than STARTING them a new
to English or German?
Cindy
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
=============
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
_______________________________________________
DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide
To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE
in the body of the message.
_______________________________________________
DIGITALDIVIDE mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman.edc.org/mailman/listinfo/digitaldivide
To unsubscribe, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word UNSUBSCRIBE
in the body of the message.
