From: Peter Kirk (peterkirk@qaya.org)
Date: Sun Dec 21 2003 - 15:33:16 EST
On 21/12/2003 11:33, Michael Everson wrote:
>> ... You
>> can't simply transliterate without taking into account difference of
>> phonetics between regions speaking variants of the same language.
>
>
> Nonsense. Of course you can. KA is KA is KA is KA and BHA is BHA is
> BHA is BHA. The *reading rules* for pronouncing what's been written
> differ, but the transliteration is by and large one-to-one. Tamil of
> course is an exception, having lost some consonants.
Michael, in view of this do you think it might be sensible to treat the
different Indic scripts as equivalent for collation purposes? This might
be especially useful with a corpus of material in one language e.g.
Sanskrit but using different scripts.
And then, how about the Semitic scripts? After all, ALEF is ALEF is ALEF
is ALEF and ...
-- Peter Kirk peter@qaya.org (personal) peterkirk@qaya.org (work) http://www.qaya.org/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun Dec 21 2003 - 16:02:43 EST