[sword-devel] locales.d submission Inuk: iu.conf & iu-utf8.conf

[Andrew Thule]

Agreed - though I'm not convinced the convention we're seeing
suggested by the Inuit Cultural Institute has been standardized to the
extend being suggested.

The language has regional variances, and the written form didn't exist
until it was introduced initially in Greenland, later Alaska based on
the Latin alphabet, whereas the written form we're dealing with,
Qaniujaaqpait was introduce introduced into  Nunavut eventually making
its way to isolated communities (Netsilik Inuit in Kugaaruk, and
Baffin Island).  Accordingly Latin Writing systems have begun to give
way to the Qaniujaaqpait form, but still reflects regional variations
in pronunciation such as the variations on vowels you seem to have
noticed (aai,  ii,  ai).

Given that this bible represents the single largest body of writing
using these glyphs in a single tome, it should try as much as possible
to represent the greatest norm.  That said, I'm not convinced the
restrictions you've noted represent that norm.  Which means I'm apt to
favour the forms submitted (which was done in Nunavut by native
speakers):

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/translation-makes-bible-available-to-inuktitut-speakers/article4227710/

However, do as you see best.  Your judgement is well trusted.
~A

On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 11:37 AM, Chris Little <chrislit at crosswire.org> wrote:
> On 08/15/2012 08:08 AM, Andrew Thule wrote:
>>
>> Yes, I see the comment you're directing my attention to now:
>>
>> "The /ai/ ᐁ-series has been recently readopted in Nunavik; /ai/ in
>> Nunavut would be ᐊᐃ. Unicode gives long /aai/ as ᐂ, although I have
>> not seen this used in texts."
>>
>> I'm not sure what to do with this however.  The bible this is suppose
>> to be supporting is also presenting ᐂ (not  ᐊᐃ), as is the OSIS, and
>> so is the USFM; the translators have not specifically spoken to.  So
>> the .conf file I sent is consistent with everything else I've seen.
>> Are you suggesting the wrong syllabic was used - or what do you
>> propose?
>>
>> ~A
>
>
> I would say that the translators should be trusted as much as possible, so
> if they want to use those glyphs in the Bible, they should be left alone.
>
> However, in the locale file, we should add spellings that do not use the
> <Cai> and <Caai> glyphs for users who may use the more restrictive
> orthography defined by the Inuit Cultural Institute.
>
>
> --Chris
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> sword-devel mailing list: sword-devel at crosswire.org
> http://www.crosswire.org/mailman/listinfo/sword-devel
> Instructions to unsubscribe/change your settings at above page