tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Thu Oct 02 17:05:01 2003
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: pronunciation vs. comprehension
On Thu, 2 Oct 2003, ...Paul wrote:
> On Thu, 2 Oct 2003 [email protected] wrote:
> > being able to pronounce the words is not necessary for comprehension, a
> > fact attested to by people who know some words only from print.
> I don't think anyone who comes here and says, "I want to learn how to read
> Klingon" really means "I want to learn how to sound out the words I see."
> 99% of the time, I think we should give them the benefit of the doubt that
> they are really interested in learning how to read *and comprehend* the
> language.
I think you miss the point. In the above context, "read" means
understand, not "sound out". When most people learn to read, they are
associating written words for "sound words" they already know. Later,
they may find themselves first experiencing new words in written form.
In languages in which the orthography does not cleanly map to
pronounciation (English, as opposed to tlhIngan), there is no guarantee
that they know how the word should sound. Almost all of us have words that
we've seen in print for years but have never spoken. Sometimes we say
them "in our heads" incorrectly; other times, they are simply symbols that
are never "pronounced" or are instead mapped to semi-unrelated "sounds".
I read 'cursor' as 'cruiser' when I was a child, and 'avatar' as a-va'tar.
I think 'and' when I see '&'. I don't think "open brace" every time I see
a '{', but that doesn't mean I don't comprehend its meaning.
![[KLI Member]](/pics/KLImemberbutton.gif "[KLI Member]"){kind=small}