A while ago when I was pondering the possible combinations of the infix <INN> of Iloko. I thought of two possible ways that it could inflect. I could not determine which was "correct", so I asked for the opinions of Iloko speakers on a Facebook group. I was told that one was possible because of Iloko phonotactics, yet was "unattested" and that other areas where Iloko is spoken might not use the form. There were other suggestions on words to use, but I am of the mind that when asking, I focus on what I presented and I wasn’t not seeking alternatives.
It was acknowledge that the forms did not “violate” the phonotactics of Iloko, although, it was a bit contrived and that it was well-formed, nevertheless.
I prefaced that the response would affect how I crafted the soon-to-be spelling dictionary. Existing literature can be used when testing the spellchecker to ensure that it is working correctly. But, the main purpose of a spelling dictionary is to check for words that are in the process of BEING written. The purpose is NOT to check the spelling of something that has ALREADY been written.
Although the responder meant well, he missed the point entirely. It is this idea of disallowing what is possible for the restrictive confines of what has been that I have had to work with. I can be rather frustrating and it is hard to find someone who can strike a balance between the two as a resource as it is also a cultural critique: What is already establish is “right”; deviations or innovations are undesirable.
No comments:
Post a Comment