I had written to a linguist contact with connections to a Ho literacy
and translation project. Interestingly enough, all work and publications
of that project is written in the Odia / Oriya script [1], i.e. in
neither of the three mentioned so far. I've been put in contact with a
Ho person on that project's staff and hope to receive more information
about scope and target group of those publications and their acceptability.
Fwiw,
Oliver
[1]
On 03-Jun-17 15:18, Amir E. Aharoni wrote:
Hi,
There is a proposal to add support for the Ho language to transaltewiki:
https://translatewiki.net/wiki/Thread:Support/Request_to_start_a_new_langua….
It is for now not implemented, and the explanation is that the request
is to do it in the Warang Citi writing system, and Ethnologue says
that it is "no longer in use". I strongly suspect that Ethnologue is
not quite correct on this matter, because there are three sources that
contradict it:
* the encoding proposal by Michael Everson
* the page at Scriptsource to which Ethnologue itself links
* an article by Norman Zide, linked from Scriptsource
I have no direct knowledge of this language, but the sources above
seem more convincing to me than Ethnologue itself.
The remaining question, however, is whether we should add more than
one variant for this language (hoc-wara, hoc-deva, and perhaps
hoc-latn) or should it be just hoc, and assumed to be written in
Warang Citi?
Thanks!
--
Amir Elisha Aharoni · אָמִיר אֱלִישָׁע אַהֲרוֹנִי
http://aharoni.wordpress.com
“We're living in pieces,
I want to live in peace.” – T. Moore
<http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient>
Virus-free.
www.avg.com
<http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient>
<#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
_______________________________________________
Langcom mailing list
Langcom(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/langcom