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

From: Jony Rosenne (rosennej@qsm.co.il)
Date: Fri Jul 09 2004 - 02:34:29 CDT

  • Next message: John Cowan: "Re: Looking for transcription or transliteration standards latin- >arabic"

    > -----Original Message-----
    > From: unicode-bounce@unicode.org
    > [mailto:unicode-bounce@unicode.org] On Behalf Of D. Starner
    > Sent: Friday, July 09, 2004 9:13 AM
    > To: unicode@unicode.org
    > Subject: RE: Looking for transcription or transliteration
    > standards latin- >arabic
    >
    >
    > > transliteration is no longer needed or useful. Transliteration
    > > is a one-to-one mapping between scripts, and the reader
    > needs to be familiar
    > > with both scripts and the transliteration rules to make
    > sense of it.
    >
    > That's not true. Looking at Wright's Historical German Grammar, I
    > see "Goth. baírand, OHG. bërant=Skr. bháranti." It would be
    > illegible to me, and probably many Germantists, if it were
    > written in three scripts instead of one. Using foreign
    > scripts is rarely of help to the casual reader, especially in
    > the frequent cases where it's not important that understand
    > the details of the transliteration scheme.

    I doubt it makes much sense to the casual reader. Witness how nearly every
    radio and television pronounces New Delhi as New Del-hi.

    Jony

    > --
    > ___________________________________________________________
    > Sign-up for Ads Free at Mail.com http://promo.mail.com/adsfreejump.htm
    >
    >
    >
    >



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Jul 09 2004 - 02:36:33 CDT