RE: Looking for transcription or transliteration standards latin- >arabic

From: Mike Ayers (
Date: Fri Jul 02 2004 - 15:53:23 CDT

  • Next message: Jony Rosenne: "RE: Looking for transcription or transliteration standards latin- >arabic"

    > From: []On
    > Behalf Of Chris Harvey
    > Sent: Friday, July 02, 2004 11:17 AM

    > Perhaps one could think of "Ha Tinh" as the English word for
    > the city, like "Rome" (English) for "Roma" (Italian), or
    > Tokyo (English) for "Tōkyō" (English transliteration of

            "Tōkyō" is not an English transliteration of Japanese, as it uses
    diacritics not found in English. The correct English transliteration is in
    fact "Tokyo", which does not round trip.

    > Japanese), or Kahnawake (English/French) for Kahnawà:ke

            Errr - didn't the Emglish/French useage predate the Mohawk alphabet?
    Pretty perverse case there.

    > (Mohawk). In these and many other cases, place-names as used
    > in foreign languages sould not be considered tranliterations,
    > but linguistic borrowings, where pronunciation and spelling
    > are often changed in the new language.

            In part you are correct, but this really only holds where the place
    name gets enough usage to develop its own name in the other language. Most
    famous places (Paris, New York, et. al.) have language specific names in
    most languages, but lesser knowns such as Hà Tĩnh are unlikely to have
    such names.

    > On the other hand, maybe "Ha Tinh" is just lazy typography.

            From National Geographic? Medoubts. This is a deliberate removal
    of the diacritics unfamiliar to English readers, and is a traditional way to
    present foreign words. If we're going to categorize trans-thingies, I think
    this deserves its own category, but since it's all relative and vague, I'm
    not terribly concerned. Mostly I just wondered if it did fit in anywhere.
    Seems it doesn't.


    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Jul 02 2004 - 15:54:40 CDT