Not three! Actually, there are *five* scripts currently used to write Konkani in. Using the alphabetical order to describe the same below: * Devanagari script, also afforded official language status in Goa * Kannada script, used by a large community in the Indian region of Karnataka * Perso-Arabic, used by a small community of Muslims along the south Indian coast. * Malayalam script: used by a diminishing number (if I understand right) of people in parts of the south Indian state of Kerala. * Roman script (earlier additional Portuguese symbols were used, now just the alphabets available on the typewriter keyboard). As you probably understand, there is a lot of discussion as to which is the "best" and "most suitable" script. The current ground-level situation is that at least three of these scripts are currently used at the ground-level, for the transfer of ideas and knowledge among the community. To complicate matters somewhat, Konkani has traditionally been a spoken language, though in Goa we had the first printing press in Asia, which landed here in 1556 (yes, 1556). My suggestion is as follows: rather than getting caught up in the script-based rivalry, we create something positive out of it. Let us make it possible for people to contribute in whatever script they feel comfortable with. The *Devanagari* and *Kannada* scripts (maybe *Malayalam* too) can ride piggy-back on the efforts of the Hindi, Kannada (and Malayalam) language initiatives. Since the script is common with these languages. So, once the technical issues are sorted out for these bigger Indian languages, Konkani's technical problems are dealt with too. Text inputting, Unicode, keyboard layout etc... all such issues are the same with the other Indian languages which they share a script with. In the script of Roman script Konkani, work on it could start almost as fast as we find volunteers (and I believe this might not be too difficult a job for now, and plan to work on it personally). The only question remains whether all the scripts will coexist in one Wikipedia -- ko.wikipedia.org -- or we have separate ones for different scripts. Giving that some writers tend to be familiar with more than one script, it might not be a bad idea to have a common Wikipedia for all the scripts of Konkani, regardless. When I met Jimmy Wales in New Delhi on Thursday last, he mentioned that all of India's national languages had Wikipedias set up. On returning back to Goa, I was disappointed that Konkani has none. Though this is a small language, Konkani *is* one of the 22 or so "national languages" of India. [That doesn't mean people use it across India, but that it has enough users to be considered revant to be a 'national' priority. Konkani got included in the Eighth Schedule of the Indian Constitution in 1987. This list defines what India's "national languages are.] Incidentally, I had a tough time also convincing the powers that be in cyberspace of the need to set up a soc.culture.indian.goa Usenet newsgroup some 3-4 years ago. It won the vote, and still continues to be an active and closely moderated group. In the digital world, the smaller cultures which don't have many millions of speakers often have a tough job in making a case to get their space under the cyber-sun, as it were. I would urge Wikipedians to consider this request with empathy and make possible a Konkani wikipedia going early. I will work to get a team to work in any situation -- a script-neutral Wikipedia, or multi Wikipedias to deal with the diverse scripts of Konkani (even if with differening levels of activity). Regards, Frederick Noronha, Independent Journalist, Goa, India. On 27/08/06, Alfio Puglisi <alfio.puglisi(a)gmail.com> wrote: -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Frederick Noronha http://fn.goa-india.org 9822122436 +91-832-240-9490 http://fredericknoronha.wordpress.com fredericknoronha(a)gmail.com

That doesn't seem possible at this point of time. Each script tends to have some small but significant dialectal variations. So, simply using some form of mechanical transalation/transiteration might render the output quite unreadable. It would be preferable to have human-created pages. Even if done in different scripts, I don't think this would cause any problems as such. Teams would work at differing paces, as per their own abilities and convenience. And work by one team might spur on others to catch up too. The issue we're shifting to is a much wider question, which has been causing worry for those keen about the Konkani language. As far as Wikipedia goes, what do you see as the suitable solution? We have two options -- a common Konkani Wikipedia, or separate ones (set up according to interest shown and activity levels initiated). FN PS: Have just been working on a portal for Goa at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portal:Goa You can see some Konkani descriptions (in English there). Since I'm not a techie, have been struggling a bit to control the templates and code! On 27/08/06, Berto <albertoserra(a)ukr.net> wrote: -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Frederick Noronha http://fn.goa-india.org 9822122436 +91-832-240-9490 http://fredericknoronha.wordpress.com fredericknoronha(a)gmail.com

Yes, that sounds realistic. Since we face no immediate problems with issues like fonts and keyboards in the Roman script (and I also know people who could volunteer), could Wikipedia start a Konkani-Roman wikipedia? Its name could be titled according to what's seen suitable by the Wikipedia naming convention. But let's do this early please, and strike while the iron is hot. I'm just back from New Delhi, where I heard Jimmy Wales talk on his plans for Wikipedia in India. If we get the right persons on board, we can scale up Konkani-Roman and also use it to encourage other Konkani scripts to get start their ventures. Thanks! FN On 27/08/06, Brianna Laugher <brianna.laugher(a)gmail.com> wrote: -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Frederick Noronha http://fn.goa-india.org 9822122436 +91-832-240-9490 http://fredericknoronha.wordpress.com fredericknoronha(a)gmail.com

Hoi, Currently we have our "own" wikipedias and we consider them NPOV. That is, we consider them NPOV within the framework of that Wikipedia. When you consider them in the light of the "other" wikipedia, there are many ways in which a bias can be proven.. if only by omission by relevant content. At this moment, countries like Iran, Iraq, Syria and North Korea are seen as enemies, when you consider how little content there is on these countries combined with the relevant information that COULD/SHOULD be told, it is partisan by ommision. Consequently, I do not think having articles in multiple scripts is much of a problem. Thanks, GerardM On 8/27/06, Brianna Laugher <brianna.laugher(a)gmail.com> wrote:

I've started on something small at http://incubator.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wp/kok Maybe, as Jimmy Wales told us in Delhi last week, the real test is to get others interested in the project and build interest. There would some difficulty in navigating between scripts -- because the vocabulary used by different scripts, and dialectal differences can sometimes be marked between two scripts. That is, the script differences tally with dialectical variations (because of geographical and other factors). But I guess we can cross the bridge when we reach it. If there's an upsurge of interest, then we're anyway not fighting over limited space here. The projects can be expanded in any direction. And if there's a lack of interest, then it's no debate anyway! But I'm keen to try to get *something* going. FN On 28/08/06, Mark Williamson <node.ue(a)gmail.com> wrote: -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Frederick Noronha http://fn.goa-india.org 9822122436 +91-832-240-9490 http://fredericknoronha.wordpress.com fredericknoronha(a)gmail.com

Thanks Fran, this is going to be helpful. Maybe a technical fix could help reduce some of the misunderstanding that creeps in due to script and dialectical differences. The problem is that most literary people aren't too tech-oriented, and vice-versa. I belong to neither camps, being a journalists writing on technology :-) FN PS: Your link is useful, I'll post it to our local GNU/Linux users' group and see how people respond. We have people use or knowing different scripts there. On 28/08/06, Francis Tyers <spectre(a)ivixor.net> wrote: -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Frederick Noronha http://fn.goa-india.org 9822122436 +91-832-240-9490 http://fredericknoronha.wordpress.com fredericknoronha(a)gmail.com

I'm not sure if you're aware of this, but there is a Chinese 'converter' between mainland (simplified), Taiwan (traditional), Hong Kong (traditional) & Singapore (simplified) scripts/dialects (??), as well as a default plain 'Chinese' which may be a mixture I guess. Maybe a goal could be to develop a similar item for these scripts. No idea how realistic that is, just throwing it out there. :) cheers Brianna On 28/08/06, Frederick FN Noronha <fredericknoronha(a)gmail.com> wrote: