I love Keao Nesmith and I love his manaʻo about the language and how we should pursue excellence. Itʻs funny because I have always said it seems like I always agree with everything he says but I FINALLY disagree with this idea that we do not need diacritical marks. As a Hawaiian Language speaker, a holder of a degree in ʻŌlelo Hawaiʻi, and a Kumu ʻŌlelo Hawaiʻi, I agree that it is baby talk, it is very beginner but the MAJORITY of our Lāhui are amatuer/beginner speakers. In my opinion, we may need to put the training wheels on for a bit in order to usher in our dream of a Hawaiian language speaking state. We cannot skip steps. Either way, I loved this podcast definitely my favorite up to date, keep it up and mahalo nui no ka hoʻouna ʻana mai!
I can't help but feel that the aversion to ʻokina and kahakō stems from the fact that English doesn't use (many) diacritical markings, which centers English orthography as the "default" or "proper" way of writing. (Most) Other languages have far more phonetic orthographies than English does, and the use of diacritical markings to make this possible is widespread. It's correct to point out the shortcomings of the Roman alphabet to convey 'ōlelo, but this glosses over the fact that it was designed, as the name suggests, to convey Latin, not English, German, Polish, Turkish, or Indonesian. Diacritical markings are what make the use of a Latin alphabet possible for languages with a richer phonetic inventory than Latin, or with phonemic distintions that the Latin alphabet cannot convey. Yes, English does without them, but English orthography is a complete phonetic mess in comparison to languages that make their orthogrophy more closely match their phonology. The lack of ʻokina anfʻd kahakō in the original Bible translation probably had more to do with it being carried out by anglophone typographers than with any deliberate decision rooted in linguistics or respect for 'ōlelo. Are they "needed"‽ Can German speakers understand written German with no umlauts and "ss"in places where it should be "ß"? Sure. But I don't think you'd find too many people who would argue that these orthographic features are "training wheels" on that basis. The fact that "brite nite lite" is equally comprehensible to "bright night light" doesn't make the former correct or the latter incorrect. Glottal stops and vowel length distinctions are phonemic in 'ōlelo, which is to say that they can change meaning. There's no reason not to use them, just as so many other languages do, to more accurately convey the entirety of the phonetic inventory of 'ōlelo.
This reminds of Hebrew. When the vowel symbols are added it is for children to learn the language but when you read the torah there are no vowel symbols because if your are fluent in Hebrew it is not necessary to use them. You will recognize the world without the vowels. I spend a lot of time in Hawaii and this man is the first I've heard to now repeat the idea that ʻokina and kahakō are somehow essential to the language but what he's saying makes sense
It sounds a lot like pointing in Cree syllabics, native speakers often leave out vowel dots and certain finals. Maybe they could have used a syllabary instead of an alphabet Sounds like there needs to be a major overhaul
His mana’o is so rich and powerful, but incredibly privileged. Is the Hawaiian language just for native speakers, or is the Hawaiian language for Hawaiians? Sure *you* don’t need diacriticals, but in a world when most Hawaiians were stripped of their opportunity to learn their ʻŌlelo kūpuna and forced to engage in the academic context, why the shaming like “oh you still need those training wheels I don’t” as if having learned Hawaiian from manaleo is some great personal accomplishment and not the immense opportunity privilege that you happened to grow up in. Gatekeeping can be important but why have you decided your are the one qualified to tell other native speakers how to speak?
I don't think he means to come off as gatekeeping or rude rather than him just stating that they're simply just not pronouncing it the same as to how the pre Latin alphabet Native speakers did and how elder Native Speakers today do, and this annoys him because he believes as Kanaka pick up Hawaiian again they should do it right as it was originally spoken. Not this new version which is unintelligible to actual Native Speakers. You should watch some of his other interviews and talks he is very nice guy.
@@riamkau808 I understand his point, I just think it’s arbitrary to choose a certain point in history and say because it was this way back then it should be this way now. Take the use of ‘okina in kou vs ko’u. Just because they’ve been using it since the 1800s it’s okay now well was it used before western contact? Who gets to determine who the true native speakers are? Again I’ll ask is the Hawaiian language just for native speakers or is it for the Hawaiians?
@@hellodumzo Personally I believe it's for everyone to appreciate, but he wants a certain standardization apparently and has chosen a side as to how he believes Hawaiian should be spoken. You make good point.
ʻAʻole. Pronunciation doesn't come from writing, writing is a symbolic representation of pronunciation. ʻŌlelo Hawaiʻi predates its written form in the Latin alphabet by many hundreds of years. So, is a word that includes an ʻokina pronounced differently than a word without the ʻokina? ʻAe. But the 'okina doesn't change the pronunciation - the pronunciation of the word changes how.we.write it.
I love Keao Nesmith and I love his manaʻo about the language and how we should pursue excellence. Itʻs funny because I have always said it seems like I always agree with everything he says but I FINALLY disagree with this idea that we do not need diacritical marks. As a Hawaiian Language speaker, a holder of a degree in ʻŌlelo Hawaiʻi, and a Kumu ʻŌlelo Hawaiʻi, I agree that it is baby talk, it is very beginner but the MAJORITY of our Lāhui are amatuer/beginner speakers. In my opinion, we may need to put the training wheels on for a bit in order to usher in our dream of a Hawaiian language speaking state. We cannot skip steps. Either way, I loved this podcast definitely my favorite up to date, keep it up and mahalo nui no ka hoʻouna ʻana mai!
I can't help but feel that the aversion to ʻokina and kahakō stems from the fact that English doesn't use (many) diacritical markings, which centers English orthography as the "default" or "proper" way of writing. (Most) Other languages have far more phonetic orthographies than English does, and the use of diacritical markings to make this possible is widespread. It's correct to point out the shortcomings of the Roman alphabet to convey 'ōlelo, but this glosses over the fact that it was designed, as the name suggests, to convey Latin, not English, German, Polish, Turkish, or Indonesian. Diacritical markings are what make the use of a Latin alphabet possible for languages with a richer phonetic inventory than Latin, or with phonemic distintions that the Latin alphabet cannot convey. Yes, English does without them, but English orthography is a complete phonetic mess in comparison to languages that make their orthogrophy more closely match their phonology. The lack of ʻokina anfʻd kahakō in the original Bible translation probably had more to do with it being carried out by anglophone typographers than with any deliberate decision rooted in linguistics or respect for 'ōlelo. Are they "needed"‽ Can German speakers understand written German with no umlauts and "ss"in places where it should be "ß"? Sure. But I don't think you'd find too many people who would argue that these orthographic features are "training wheels" on that basis. The fact that "brite nite lite" is equally comprehensible to "bright night light" doesn't make the former correct or the latter incorrect. Glottal stops and vowel length distinctions are phonemic in 'ōlelo, which is to say that they can change meaning. There's no reason not to use them, just as so many other languages do, to more accurately convey the entirety of the phonetic inventory of 'ōlelo.
Great podcast! Lots of fantastic information about the native Hawaiian language.
Mahalo :)
This reminds of Hebrew. When the vowel symbols are added it is for children to learn the language but when you read the torah there are no vowel symbols because if your are fluent in Hebrew it is not necessary to use them. You will recognize the world without the vowels. I spend a lot of time in Hawaii and this man is the first I've heard to now repeat the idea that ʻokina and kahakō are somehow essential to the language but what he's saying makes sense
This is excellent!!
It sounds a lot like pointing in Cree syllabics, native speakers often leave out vowel dots and certain finals.
Maybe they could have used a syllabary instead of an alphabet
Sounds like there needs to be a major overhaul
His mana’o is so rich and powerful, but incredibly privileged. Is the Hawaiian language just for native speakers, or is the Hawaiian language for Hawaiians? Sure *you* don’t need diacriticals, but in a world when most Hawaiians were stripped of their opportunity to learn their ʻŌlelo kūpuna and forced to engage in the academic context, why the shaming like “oh you still need those training wheels I don’t” as if having learned Hawaiian from manaleo is some great personal accomplishment and not the immense opportunity privilege that you happened to grow up in. Gatekeeping can be important but why have you decided your are the one qualified to tell other native speakers how to speak?
I don't think he means to come off as gatekeeping or rude rather than him just stating that they're simply just not pronouncing it the same as to how the pre Latin alphabet Native speakers did and how elder Native Speakers today do, and this annoys him because he believes as Kanaka pick up Hawaiian again they should do it right as it was originally spoken. Not this new version which is unintelligible to actual Native Speakers. You should watch some of his other interviews and talks he is very nice guy.
@@riamkau808 I understand his point, I just think it’s arbitrary to choose a certain point in history and say because it was this way back then it should be this way now. Take the use of ‘okina in kou vs ko’u. Just because they’ve been using it since the 1800s it’s okay now well was it used before western contact? Who gets to determine who the true native speakers are? Again I’ll ask is the Hawaiian language just for native speakers or is it for the Hawaiians?
@@hellodumzo Personally I believe it's for everyone to appreciate, but he wants a certain standardization apparently and has chosen a side as to how he believes Hawaiian should be spoken. You make good point.
6:10 that is really truly bizarre sounding!
6:19 .... Whoever came up with that?!
Did the okina change the way sound of words?
ʻAʻole. Pronunciation doesn't come from writing, writing is a symbolic representation of pronunciation. ʻŌlelo Hawaiʻi predates its written form in the Latin alphabet by many hundreds of years. So, is a word that includes an ʻokina pronounced differently than a word without the ʻokina? ʻAe. But the 'okina doesn't change the pronunciation - the pronunciation of the word changes how.we.write it.
You guys so blessed you can olelo. We like learn. Teach us on here? Waiting on you. 🫵😊