[governance] MSism and democracy

[Deirdre Williams]

To follow on from Daniel, and to reply especially to Tapani - yes I'm an
idealist in that what I express is an ideal, but also yes I am aware of the
obstacles at a pragmatic level - so neatly expressed by Carlos :-)

However - I agree with all those who feel that this issue is too often
dismissed. Like Daniel I feel that the right to communicate in one's
preferred language is a basic human right, as is the right to be "heard" in
the sense of understood. It's a basic human right in the "global village" of
the "virtual world" to get all of the cliches out of the way.

I know that it requires a huge change in people's attitudes - what they take
for granted. But change IS possible - if one can just find a long enough
lever to start the smallest momentum.

Deirdre

On 9 June 2011 08:52, Daniel Pimienta <pimienta at funredes.org> wrote:

>
>  I'm afraid, however, that it isn't all that useful in practice. It works
>> well in a true bilingual setting, but not so well in larger, really
>> multilingual environments.
>>
>
> Dear Tapani,
>
> There is a huge amount of subjectivity in the language issue.
>
> Your argumentation is perfectly correct and nobody shall disagree.
> The fact is that each person can develop his/her own judgment/argument in
> the matter of selection of the language to express in a virtual
> international community, and, the same, nobody shall disagree.
>
> The key point is only to respect each person's subjectivity when it comes
> to the decision of the language to express (this point, by the way, can
> easily be argued as a basic Human Right).
>
> If that premise is clear, then, depending on contexts, budgets, priorities,
> etc. the collectivity can make decision on using interpreters/translators
> (high cost and high quality) or devices for mutual intercomprehension aid
> (low cost and low quality). Obviously this is not binary and there is a
> continuum of cost vs. quality options and real pragmatism is to pay due
> attention to the options instead of concluding the only option is Englih for
> every one.
>
> Ignoring the issue (with the pretext of a non neutral "pragmatism") is
> simply ignoring the basic right of too many people (the percentage of the
> Human population understanding English is estimated by many experts less
> than 15% of the 7 billons, even if, obviously, this figure may rise up in
> specific socio-profesional environments).
>
> Sydämellisesti,
>
> Daniel
>
>
>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>    governance at lists.cpsr.org
> To be removed from the list, visit:
>    http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>
> For all other list information and functions, see:
>    http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>    http://www.igcaucus.org/
>
> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
>
>


-- 
“The fundamental cure for poverty is not money but knowledge" Sir William
Arthur Lewis, Nobel Prize Economics, 1979
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20110609/89c0b8a2/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.cpsr.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t