From: Jonathan Rosenne (jr@qsm.co.il)
Date: Thu Jun 18 2009 - 13:35:21 CDT
Of course the translator should translate Unicode according the habits and needs of his language. For example, in Hebrew it would be יוניקוד or יוּנִיקוׁד rather than Unicode (http://unicode.org/standard/translations/hebrew.html).
I don't see why translations into languages that use the Latin script should be disadvantaged.
Jony
-----Original Message-----
From: unicode-bounce@unicode.org [mailto:unicode-bounce@unicode.org] On Behalf Of Hans Aberg
Sent: Thursday, June 18, 2009 8:33 PM
To: Asmus Freytag
Cc: Andr? Szabolcs Szelp; satai; Jo? ?d?m; Unicode Mailing List
Subject: Re: Another translation posted
On 18 Jun 2009, at 18:46, Asmus Freytag wrote:
> On 6/18/2009 8:01 AM, Hans Aberg wrote:
>> I think it does not have anything with the age of the word to do,
> Certainly it's independent of the word "to do". :D
That interpretation is not possible since "to do" is not one word but
two. :-)
> I think you meant:
>
> "it does not have anything to do with the age of the word "
Sorry.
> I still disagree with you.
>
> It very much depends not only on "age", but also on the "time" of
> adoption. The current fashion for geographic name is to follow the
> preferences or usage of the "owner" of the name (Beijing for Peking).
That is only one principle that has always been in use in all times.
Beijing only slowly came into use, I think one may still see "Peking"
here in Sweden, and those in the area may use a blend of Mumbai and
Bombay. And few spell Michigan as the Ojibwe Mishigama, because those
in the area don't care what the correct form is.
> For other borrowings, many more readers are familiar with
> orthographic conventions of the source language, and that has an
> effect on how quickly (or slowly) the orthography of loan words is
> homogenized.
Unicode is quite awkward in other languages, because the "U" and "o"
are in English pronounced with two sounds, and the "e" is mute. So
this opens up for local adaptations. One might compare with a word
like "Euro". In Swedish this might pronounced as "Evro" or without
diphthong "E-uro"; the English pronunciation is a bit awkward. The
English word "juice" [d?u:s] is spelled the same in Swedish but
pronounced [ju:s] perhaps because there is no [?]; there was a
movement to spell it "jos", but it did not catch on, really. The
English product name "Walkman" was in Swedish "Freestyle" - so an
English word can be "translated" into Swedish using another English
word. Another example is "email" or "e-mail", which in Swedish often
is "mail", often written as "mejl".
> That said, each language has its own style of dealing with loan
> words, and each loan word follows its own trajectory in that
> process. Arguing about supposed inconsistencies isn't going to help,
> what matters is how the locals go about using that term.
I think those that discuss the translation should try to agree on
something, rather trying to figure out what the "correct" form is -
otherwise, the translator decides.
Otherwise, "Unicode" could be anything in any other language.
Hans
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Jun 18 2009 - 13:37:27 CDT