[LMB] Why we still need paper books

Eric Oppen technomad at intergate.com
Wed Sep 21 00:18:24 BST 2011


Quoting Paula Lieberman <paal at gis.net>:

> Literacy is something even the upper classes couldn't do in most of
> history, Charlemagned learned to read as an adult, was never all that
> facile reading, and was never really literate as regarding being able
> to -write- fluently...

"Literacy" defined how?  In Charlemagne's time, that meant, as I  
understand it, being able to read and write Latin---not Frankish (does  
anybody know what that language was like, and did Charlemagne still  
speak it?) not Gallo-Romance or Early French (again, I'm not sure what  
the dividing line between those languages is.)

In China, you weren't considered "literate" unless you could handle  
Classical Chinese until relatively very recently.  Even people who  
could read and write modern Chinese weren't counted if they couldn't  
do the Classical language, which is very different---very compressed,  
among other things.



----------------------------------------------------------------
This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.





More information about the Lois-Bujold mailing list