[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

6464: Re: 6453: Re: 6444: Re: 6425: Poincy replies to Henrius (fwd)

From: caineve@idt.net

Well, it takes one to be out of the linguistic laboratory to underline
the disparity between the standard imposed on Ayitians arbitrarily and
the real spoken Ayitian language. Let me tell you Mrs. Henrius, you must
have some courage to speak the truth unlike some of us who are reluctant
to point out these vivid facts. Let me warn you: you will hear from
linguists, but hold on tight somewhere or fasten your seatbelt
because  vertigo will play a number on you when inundated with
linguistic technicalities that have nothing to do with the reality of
Ayitian language. Consequently, you will have to agree and said to
yourself later this guy just did not make sense. 

For my part I shall be plain and explain why my spelling of Ayitian
differs from what is the standard. You need to realize that I am writing
in English. For the word Ayitian is the English spelling and not the
"KREYOL" spelling. In other words there is no inconsistency there.
Perhaps if you followed the logic of the "LINGUIST-KREYOLISTS" and as
might have studied, you would say the standard spelling would remain
"Ayisyen" regardless the language being used. How they would go about
pronouncing it either in English or French respectively to their
phonetic framework, I just don't know.

I must make clear before going any further that Ayitian as I call the
language is not the name officially given to the language by the
KREYOLISTS. Wait to hear their arguments about
this: they will either hide behind the law or can't logically explain it
at all. The name they are promoting is "Haitian Creole". 

My contention was: 

1) Creole is not a language
2) Whatever that the people of Ayiti speak is a language
3) Why then call it Creole and worst Haitian Creole for a mere
differentiation from other true Creoles?
4) Because whatever the people of Ayiti speak is a language and it is
unique to them why not calling it by the name of the people?
5) Obviously the name of the people is derived from the name of the
country, Ayiti.

Ayiti would be the correct spelling for most languages with slight
variations due to phonetic distortion which is quite acceptable. Please
bear with me because these arguments are not new and Linguist-Kreyolists
have NEVER NEVER NEVER provided a satisfiable and sound counter argument
besides linguistic twists. 

If Ayiti is the root word that will remain such in other languages and
from which will stem derivative words like the name of the people and
its language, it is evident that these words will bear the prefix
"Ayiti"  (allow me to call it such) to which will be plugged the
determinative suffix in English "an" and in French "en". At this point
we will stay in the phonetic framework of these languages and this is
where we will find the slight variations in spelling and which you have
cleverly observed and pointed out. 

As a person whose native language is English you know that the sound is
better produced in English by simply plugging "an" to the prefix "Ayiti"
to call the people by the name derived from the root word Ayiti. Then
you have a perfect English sound close enough to what the people is
called. It is that simple, but Professor Linguist will tell you it is
not that simple, but he can never make it simple. 

In regards to French now, the word will bear the same sound with that of
"Ayisyen", except that instead of having an "s" we have the "t" in
French. When the letter "t" precedes the suffix "ion" and "ien" in a
word, it has an "s" sound. Therefore the French word would be spelled
"Ayitien". That explains why we would have Ayitian, Ayitien and Ayisyen
respectively to the three languages. This should not be considered as a
spelling variation within the Ayitian language. It is rather the use of
three different languages that requires the different spelling due to
different phonetic rules. This is where the Linguist-Kreolists stick
their head in a black hole like a serpent trapped would do. They
arbitrarily and capriciously decided to make the Ayitian spelling
different from that of the French to create a distinct standard
language. I have nothing against that but guys, please, be creative.
Creativity is everything they lack. 

But the burning question is where in God's name do they get the "s" in
"Ayisyen" when this specific sound comes directly from the way the word
is said in French considering the French phonetic rule applied to the
"t" preceding the suffix "ion" and "ien"? Trust me they have great
linguistic answers and wait to hear them. Don't get me wrong, I have no
problem with the deviation, but the logic they put out is too "pompous".
They actually want us to believe that's the way it comes out from the
people's mouth and in fact the French sound "t" for "s" does not exist
in Ayitian phonetic table without considering the origin of the "s"
sound in the Ayitian language for this particular word. How arbitrary
and capricious can this standard be?

To dissociate Ayitian from the French, they come with complicated
linguistic technicalities to resolve a simple matter. That way, they
will remain the referent power on the matter and no one can dare
question their logic. All of that were done in a laboratory and no true
objective studies were conducted to create a standard spelling according
to the reality that you have observed. What troubles me most, these guys
were the same individuals fighting tooth and nail to prevent the
language to evolve and reach its current status. Realizing their
hopeless fight in suppressing the language, they change side to now
steal away the progress from the real people that made the language what
it is today. 

Where were they when the people were "breast feeding" the language to
give it strength and outdo the French they were promoting to the
detriment of the spoken Creole then? Its evolution makes it the
full-blown language that it is today? So well hidden in their first
world laboratories, they were nowhere to be found to help the people
elevate their language.  The tide has turned against them and everyone
knows that they have done nothing to make the language what it is today. 

Today, they are changing tune and embracing the fight of the people in
giving life to their language. I call them "opportunist linguists".  In
a very condescending manner, they stepped out of their laboratories with
complicated stuff in their baggage to tell the people; they can't say
this or that and must say this or that. Who is the real creator of the
language the people or them? We are talking of more than two centuries
of language formation/creation by the people with no help whatsoever
from no expert. What's up now?  

To answer your question, they are the guys who have played hard to kill
the people's language (Ayitian, Ayitien, Ayisyen) some decades ago. Now
whose side are they on? Again I am re-posing my question: why today the
linguists refused to persuade the government to call the language
Ayitian? Why are they insisting that it be called Haitian Creole when
they know it's not Creole and can't be one of the variants? 

Well, if they don't keep it as such what will become of their laboratory
studies? We need not to forget that to elevate the language name to
Haitian Creole and make it official all that was needed was an
anti-Duvalier sentiment.  These linguists are just like ethnologists
whose work will be meaningless if they no longer find backward
communities to conduct studies on. How else to keep their field alive if
not by keeping their object of studies at the bottom of the pit by
praising their way of life and fighting for their preservation?

Mrs. Henrius although there are more to be said to validate your
observation, I must end here; believe me I can go on and on and also
withstand the wave of Linguists' technicalities excluding
reality, if they wishe to dignify your pertinent inquiry. I don't want
further strengthen my reputation in Corbettville as lengthy. Maybe
later, we will have more to say plainly.

My best wishes to all and let's "keep hope alive" for a better Ayiti.

In regards to Christmas how can a society delve into a big fiesta when
its future is so dark?

Ayiti has lived, lives and will live