Print

Print


Kjell Rehnstr=F6m wrote: [snip]
 
> Kjell R writes:
> This seams to be the method of the Teach Yourself books. They never giv=
e
> you a whole text but sentences without a context. I like context when I=
 
> learn languages.
 
The Teach Yourself Dutton Speedwords book was not a grammar book, as was
Dutton's original text. The TYDS was meant to teach the shorthand part of=
 
Speedwords and approached it that way. It was the TYDS book that first go=
t me
started with Speedwords. Then, since it had the address to write to in it=
, I
ordered the full system. And, then, stupidly, in the 1970's I lost all th=
ose
books. But, today, I have recovered all those texts and more. I keep find=
ing
all kinds of interesting tidbits about Dutton and Speedwords everyday.
 
>
>
> Bob writes:
> > I have a "new" used copy of the 1943 Interglossa. Hogben seems to me
> >quite thorough in explaining Interglossa. I have not seen any of the G=
losa
> >publications, except some basic info on the net, so I can't speak to w=
hat
> >they have published in their other works.
> >
> >However, I might mention, Hogben mentions Speedwords, surprisingly, in=
 the
> >1943 book Interglossa. I say surprisingly because Speedwords first tex=
t
> >book says it was also published in 1943. Anyway, Hogben knew of Speedw=
ords
> >and again spoke highly of it and called it "ingenious" as have others.=
 
>
> And then follows 35 lines of pangegyrics about Speedwords. It is the
> difference between languages like Esperanto, Ido and Speedwords on the =
one
> hand and Interlingua and Novial on the other. The latter can be read by=
 
> persons versed in one or more of the great Western languages. That mean=
s
> that you don't have to write long blocks of text about them. This is no=
t
> necessary until you have to convince monoglot Scandinavians, Finns and
> Russians (to mention but a few examples). Those of them who have the
> necessary linguistic base - and there is more of them as one might thin=
k -
> can read the languages, not the information about them.
 
I think Hobben cleary argued point that ease of instant readability is no=
t
always what it's cracked up to be. As far as Speedwords goes, he, and I,
clearly admit one needs some learning in order to be able to begin readin=
g
Speedwords. Remember, it is a shorthand system unlike any other, it can b=
e used
universally. And, after about 20 minutes or less, one can begin reading
Speedwords. And, with such a small basic vocab. to memorize, anyone with =
a good
memory could memorize that in a couple of hours. And, it would be easier =
to
carry around on a card than Basic's 850.
 
> I am now copying a Novial text. I can understand everything in it, alth=
ough
> I have not studied Novial too intensively.
 
Could you read it that quickly if someone wrote it from dictation in shor=
thand?
You would have the same difficulty as with Speedwords until you learned t=
he
basics of the shorthand system used. And, Speedwords as a shorthand syste=
m has
no strange symbols to learn. And, from trying to learn Gregg at one time,=
 I can
say Speedwords is definitely easier. One person has already asked me if I=
 would
produce a Novial-Speedwords dictionary when everything has been settled.
 
I'm already starting one for the basic 1,000 words needed for basic Chine=
se
communication. And, others are in the works.
 
> I wonder if Speedwords could not be used in the translation and
> interpreting business? Any ideas?
 
Yes, it could be, and on the new website we have a statement there about
translation services to begin soon.
 
Al l sue,
Bob