At 20:46 -0800 2006-03-24, Peter Constable wrote:
>I had considered macrolanguage by what seemed like an analogous
>situation to Chinese: various distinct languages, but there is a
>written form that (to some extent) can be used by all. But with the
>further explanation Michael provides, it doesn't sound like that at
>The ID "zh" is widely used for "Chinese" text; as such, it's
>entirely appropriate to refer to content that is in Mandarin "zh"
>versus Cantonese "zh" versus Hokkien "zh" etc. If N'Ko is a
>macrolanguage, then it should make sense to refer to the Bambara
>variety of N'Ko versus the Maninka variety of N'Ko etc. But if I
>understand Michael's description correctly, that would *not* be
>Michael gives Interlingua as an analogy. That is not like "zh".
>Given what I've heard from Michael so far, I think that, if we code
>it, it should be considered an individual language, not a
>macrolanguage, and not a register or dialect of some other language.
By the way. N'Ko Alphabet Day is 14 April. If the JAC could approve
and publish the application for N'Ko (nqo as it happens) *on* 14
April, it will make a lot of people happy. I know, you don't *have*
to make the effort to do this, but it would be rather nice for the
Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com