Eberhard, Part of me says that your remarks are tongue in cheek, but I'll play
along and respond all the same...
Quoting Dr Eberhard W Lisse <[log in to unmask]>:
> Personally, I think that whoever can afford a PC can speak the language
> required to operate it.
> Especially in Africa.
1. By this logic, as I read it, English would still be the only language of
software and the internet. No language options for those who might prefer their
first or another language. No computer use for those who don't conform.
2. Why shouldn't one change - or more to the point, add to - the "language
required to operate" PCs in order to facilitate options and wider use? The
potential to do that is one of the advantages of the technology.
3. In Africa, it's more often not "whoever can afford [to buy] a PC," but rather
who can afford to pay the cybercafe fee.
4. Considering "ICT4D" and community telecenter projects, is it then "whoever
can walk through the door can speak the language required to operate [PCs]"?
5. Computer systems are currently available in many languages (except for those
of Africa), so which of them are you referring to?
6. Assuming you meant English, I'll leave this subject with a funny but
supposedly true quote attributed to Texas legislator (later governor) Miriam
Ferguson in 1924: "If English was good enough for Jesus Christ, it ought to be
good enough for the children of Texas."
> And to boast that they translated something into Afrikaans under this
> heading is plain rubbish.
Why? (Sorry, but is such a dismissal anything more?)