Transliteracy and Glocalization, or should it be Glocalisation?

A rather hefty title for a heavy subject, but one which affects us all. Danah Boyd has written an enlightening articulation of what is in store for us with Web2.0. She says:

Web2.0 is about glocalization, it is about making global information available to local social contexts and giving people the flexibility to find, organize, share and create information in a locally meaningful fashion that is globally accessible.

What will this mean for the way we conceptualise and write about/in that web? The very first question that comes to my mind is that in order to be included in the larger discussion via tags (like the one I have added to this article so it is picked up by Technorati)  we have to spell glocalization with a z (US English) and not an s (UK English) so for me as a native UK writer, there is an immediate and obvious problem of US language colonialism in the very notion of glocalis/zation, and one which will not be obvious to American and other non-UK readers. This is, of course, hugely ironic! But it also is inevitable, and simply means that we need more intelligent tagging systems which can tag across diverse languages. No doubt someone somewhere is developing that as we speak, I hope.

(On a lighter note, having to spell the word with a z (zed, zee) reminds me of being in America and having to pronounce banAAAna as baNANa in order to be understood, something which feels indescribably odd in the mouth, as does calling people 'Sir', a mode of address which, for good or ill, we never use in the UK. I love all these differences but am also very sensitive to them.)

But I'm going to leave that aside in this post, and simply encourage you to read Danah Boyd's analysis and think about what this means in relation to language and transliteracy. It's extremely interesting. Why Web2.0 matters: preparing for glocalization.

Technorati tag: Glocalization

Comments

[David de Gernier]

Glocalis(z)ation/Web 2.0?

Buzz-words* gaining some currency to describe a process which has been evolving for many years. This is nothing new.Surely this is what has been happening naturally as the web becomes more a pro-active and interactive space where rather than being a provider of information to a passive consumer, the web is now an interactive arena, where information flows both ways. Indeed Blogs and Wikis are results of this evolution.

Also this information is being provided in many more diverse ways —text, graphics, video, audio.

As in a biological process, genetic and phenotypic like developments and adaptations will occur and if they prove useful or beneficial to the organism as a whole they will be accepted and developed further. If not they will will be bred out of the system.I would not, however, like it to become a question of survival of the fittest. For I fear that would mean control would be in the hands of the few, rather than a free voice and platform for the many.Same old, same old.

*An aside. While accepting that language is not and should not be static but must evolve to encompass new knowledge and needs, I must admit to having a problem with some of the “Americanisations” of the English language. I am also aware that this is based on no logical reasoning and is a purely emotional gut response. Rather like seeing an old friend being abused whilst being impotent to do anything about it.

[David Brake]

I would also note that in order to effectively join this conversation you have to know about tags, know how Technorati uses them, and be aware that there are people out there using that particular tag to describe this phenomenon. It may be at some point that there will be a "shake out" and a few core "Web 2.0" tools will end up widely used but at the moment it is a full-time job just keeping abreast of the new tools and their capabilities. I think this is in danger of creating a kind of "digital divide" between those who are hyper-connected and comfortable with these tools and those who think that just owning a blogger blog will automatically connect them to those networks.

[Sue Thomas]

I feel optimistic, though, that within 5 years the tagging system will have been properly integrated across applications so that it will be much more seamless than it is now.