I'll bite :-) >> In Ghana, the lingua franca is Twi. The argument you >> make applies here too. But the other languages will want the same >> status and soon, you get to have many different languages.
> It does not matter how many languages demand for the status. If there > are people to translate the software so be it. Lets not fabricate a > predefined framework in which to use IT, I would prefer that we let it > gel with the societies and eventually if the efforts cant be sustained > they wither out in favour of the sustainable ones. Its all about > evolution. The real status stems from sheer numbers. You can translate the software alright. How many use it (directly or indirectly) determines the collateral benefits. My observation is that there is more information value in a common collection than in individual collections. Yes, evolution can handle unsustainable efforts but why not apply efforts instead to another information lever that delivers more? The biggest lever is the global information pool, the one where others are also creating and expanding. We can thus get more than we put in, while we build capacity and strength. >> Language is to me important for two purposes: One is to communicate, >> the other is to store knowledge. Even though the article calls for >> tools to adapt to people and not the other way round, it fails to >> admit that people do adapt to technology. > > G, but that is obvious. In anything, there is always a half way point. > Technology is on one side of the rope and the masses are on the opposite > side. Do you want the masses to move all the way across the rope to the > Technology side? I dont think that is feasible. However translation is No. Technology is in the masses. It's about identifying a problem, selecting a solution to it, and effecting it. Technology is just an amplifier for that process, making it more efficient. Information is another amplifier. The wealth of a nation lies in its ability to have more efficient processes than other nations as well as better exploit its natural resources etc. The more efficient the nation is, the more it can do for its people. The nation is made up of people, who by being more effective, make the nation more efficient. This is where the amplifications come in handy. As soon as you create any information pool, you also start to create value (niche markets). There's no reason why both can't be done at the same time and I guess that's just what you are doing. The same thing happened here with radio. Local language stations have many more listeners than the foreign language stations. That means there is a strong demand for local content. Fast forward to established local content. If we now have a lot of consumers, then we have a market to tap. That's great. But can we sell this to others? My fear is, will it fragment us? Will we grow as a continent through fragmented groups, or will we grow by focusing on unification efforts? It is here that I feel that we should unite with ourselves and the 'Latin' of today to avoid fragmentation. > one of the efforts that will enable Technology and the Massess meet at > the centre of the rope. Have you ever bothered to find out the cost of > learning a foreign language vis a vis Twi ? Do you mean the cost of schooling? Or teacher salaries? I am assuming that the foreign language would be taught in school. I think of those costs as including creating material, translating it etc. If you think of localization as selecting appropriate content, or as creating/adding content that is more relevant to your locality, then I think that you would see a huge amount of high quality information being accessible to the masses at a lower cost (less duplication of effort). >> Language is not a tool. It is a technology. While it is important to >> develop the capacity of the local languages, the only way to be truly >> competitive globally is to compete on the global front (not hide >> locallly, which is the case when you turn into an introvert) > > As we compete globally lets not forget that your kin are comfortable in > the environs of Navrongo (Northern Ghana) with the village as their > world. You still have to address their problems too especially if you > have the nose for a buck :) Better schools. I'd like some of them to go abroad, acquire knowledge, become globally competitive and return home. I'd also like to see some of them (most in fact) be able to achieve the same without having to go abroad. >> I pose this question:- >> >> If Newton's Laws of Motion and Einstein's Theory of Relativity were >> discovered at the same time (one in Luganda, and the other in Twi) how >> long would it take for the information to get to the other side? > > I wouldnt like to speculate on this one. However if the Baganda society > had been that advanced to have one of their own become a Newton, then > certainly the circumstances would have been very favourable for > technology transfer and exchange within and without their boundaries. Language differences impede the transfer of ideas. Yes, technology mitigates that. Here's how I look at the odds: If you have N languages, for information flow to be direct, you would need N(N-1) translators. Translation of replies is also needed. So you need 2*N(N-1) translators. There is a limit, without machine translation, on how much you can translate and on how quickly you can translate. This limit applies to each of the 2*N(N-1) translators. It makes the whole process inefficient. So I ask then, about the less important ideas, will they make it across under such circumstances? Ordinary ideas like this discussion itself. Would we be able to talk to each other if not for the foreign language? -- G. _______________________________________________ LUG mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://kym.net/mailman/listinfo/lug %LUG is generously hosted by INFOCOM http://www.infocom.co.ug/
