21 / 70
9
more highly differentieted sounda, but that
1f
thllee
111111\8
two dialeeta would
bring out independent literatura then the leas highly differentiated dialect
would write only its own sounda.
Thua, for example, in union meterial for
Cuzco and Bolivia, both final "j" and final "q" would be written, sinee Cuzco
has the two final fricativa velera after vowela: for meterial preparad for
just the Cuzco area, the two sounds would continua to be representad: but in
separete meterial preparad for Bolivie elone, only
\he
ayllable final
11
j''
should bs representad since final
11
j
11
end fricativa eyllable final
11
q
11
fell
together into one aound, (but Bolivia would continua to write the initiel
stop
11
q-" ). The reaaon for desiring a Wliform alphabet within theee limita,
thet is to aay, thll besic alphsbet with modificetions where sounds differ,
1s
that moet of the dialects of
~uechua
are aufficiently cloee together that
a strong movement for
~uechua
cultural unity could finelly bridge soma of
the es dialect barriera, even as was done in t he days of the Incas.
Some of
the more cloesly relatad dielects could do this much mere eesily than othsrs,
end even now could profitebly sxchange literatura preparad for the separata
dialects, eepacially where the reeding Indien wes aufficiently advenced
culturelly
te
be able to get value from the meteriele in spite of the dialect
differences. The amount of velue which would be gaired would to a consider–
able axtent be conditioned by the ability of the individual reader, end even
aem1-literatea would get something from the material even though ite efficiency
would be drastically lowered ea opposed to mBtsriels preparad directly for
them.
"(lO) The deaire for written mBteriels which would crose minor dielect
bounderiea
in
so far es thia could be proved feesible: The conference early
aaw that there would be a great saving of time, and duplication of effort
as wsll as of finenciel outlay "ould be avoided, if me set of written
materiels would serve over as wide en ares ea poseible. This would be trua
of primera and other metsriala for semi-Uteratea.
It would also
be
trua
of civic meteriela such as hygiene and agricultura for evangelicel work,
Sunday School storie a, tracts, end Bible tranalations, etc. This aeving would
finally allow for a largar variety of material inesmuch es the money and
effort aaved in one direction could be inveeted in wider stock, and ultimBtely
lower sale price. However, there was a check to the amount of adventege which
would be gained by this uniformity, nsmely that the immediate efficiency for
ths reading public as
1t
now standa--mainly eemi-11teratea--would be con–
siderably 1opaired, inesmuch as even a few depart\1l'es in sound, vocabulary or
grammar can hinder such a person a great deal. This then might actually resul t
in lowering the reading public inste!ld of increaaing it, for some yeara to
come, and temporarily defeat some of the purposea for which 1mion would be
sought.
Furthermore, for advancad raedera there is a losa in efficiency which
can only be overcome--if the dialecto vary widely--by a long hard achooling.
English, for example, serves from Boston to Australia, but on the other hand,
i t
takee several years of school before a child can read fluently: and to their
dying day English scholars are perpetually tied to their dictionaries when
untamiliar words need to be apellad; in oontrest with this even an Indian
child can learn to read Spanish (which is fairly phonemic in ita writing), in
a year'a time if he has a good teacher, and this should aleo be strikingly
true in bis own language.
In addition,
1f
the language ia phonemically wri tten
and the pupil has mestered the simple sounde, no dictionary has to be consul ted
to learn how to spell or prono1mce, This saves much effort.
It is true that
under a school syetem or government and economic use, a language can croas
wide dialect boundariee, but it wes recognized in this oonference thst if theee
factor a were not present, such dialact uniformity of l1teratura would havs a