[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]

Re: Willinakaqe

On 13.05.2011 21:49, Augusto Haro wrote:
> Wait a minute. First, you _didn't_ use this orthography. You used
> the Azumchefi/Azümchefe orthography, the only one that uses both q
> and ll. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mapudungun_alphabet

 How do you know what orthography we used?

I thought the table in the Wikipedia article I linked to was exhaustive. Of the systems listed in that table, Azümchefe is the only one that uses both the symbol ll and the symbol q.

I had failed to look at the Spanish article on this topic. It mentions another system that uses both ll and q; but apparently this system was only used in one book published in 1930.

> Second, the Ragileo orthography (as Wikipedia calls it) uses one
> letter for every sound. As a consequence, it uses some letters in
> very idiosyncratic ways.*

 So is it a defective system because of this? In such a case, why?

I did not say it is defective. I only meant to say that it uses some letters in ways that are very different from the ways in which the same letters are used in most or all other languages.

> V is not at all what you think it is; it is a vowel that is written
> ü or y in the other orthographies
 As far as I understand, not according to Raguileo, in the citation I
 made before, which considers it as a variable "semi-vowel" or
 "semiconsonant". Thanks for the sound files. The most similar they
 sound in Spanish is like "u" (as sounds in the end of the word
 "Mobutu" in English).

How about the Spanish g as in pagar?

 the use of "v" in place of the "u" in old Castilian and Latin

V and U have only been considered separate letters since the 17th/18th century. In Classical Latin, this single letter was used for a long vowel, a short vowel, and the consonant/semiconsonant/semivowel [w] -- this [w] later became [v].

> According to the table in the Wikipedia article, this system
> nonetheless distinguishes y and j.
 I do not understand the reason of this. Because we did not use these
 two characters in the name.

I was talking about the sound denoted by ll in some orthographies. More on this later.

> I read through the pdf of Mapuche cited and it's clear that it uses
> a very different spellings to transcribe sounds and so is not a
> reliable guide when applied to the spelling Willinakaqe. ... The
> transcription system in the Wikipedia article uses "g" for this
> sound.
 What makes the Raguileo system less reliable than other sources,
 including Wikipedia, as to be so easily dismissed when dealing with

The fact that you didn't use it. If you had used it, the name would be "Wijinakaqe".

 Nice point. However, as far as I was told, there are local
 variations in this language. Although our animal is from Argentina,
 and the source I cite is Chilean, while yours is Argentinian, I am
 not sure if the writing of this particular word, kaqe, is different
 in Chile. I suppose it is not, for the writing systems, either from
 Raguileo or Azümchefe, come from Chile.

The different spelling systems are not meant to represent differences in the language, they are more or less independent attempts to create a writing system for the language.

 Or are you sure the "ll" in "Willi" sounds as in the Spanish "ll" in

As in very conservative kinds of Spanish, yes.

However, pretty much all Spanish speakers these days are yeístas.