Mimi

"devil" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]. ..
    > On Fri, 05 Nov 2004 19:41:07 +0200, Henry wrote:
    >> One simple example is the name for the capital of China. In Chinese, of
    >> course, it has always been written using the same character(s). In
    >> English, the sounds have in the past been transliterated as Peiping,
    >> Peking and (the currently popular one) Beijing. English speakers
    >> pronounce these words differently, yet all are attempts to capture the
    >> sound(s) of the _one_ Chinese name. _That_ is transliteration.
    > ........
    > As to Peking, isn't that a transliteration of the name as pronounced in
    > a minor Southern dialect called Cantonese?

Is it transliteration if you're going from a hieroglyph to letters? From a
pictogram to letters denoting sounds?

Marianne

Henry

Mimi <[email protected]> wrote:

    > Is it transliteration if you're going from a hieroglyph to letters? From a
    > pictogram to letters denoting sounds?

Interesting question.

If the pictogram can be spoken--in other words, if there is a particular
sound or sequence of sounds associated with the hieroglyph, then yes.

Do hieroglyphs constitute language? There are many languages that have
no written form, but it would be hard to imagine a language that can't
be spoken.

cheers,

Henry

Miguel Cruz

Henry <[email protected]> wrote:
    > Miguel Cruz <[email protected]> wrote:
    >> Henry <[email protected]> wrote:
    >>> Miguel Cruz <[email protected]> wrote:
    >>>> Frank F. Matthews <[email protected]> wrote:
    >>>>> I agree & wonder just how one manages to translate a place name? What
    >>>>> is the content that is to be translated. I'll grant that there are some
    >>>>> "Nord Kappe" could be translated to "Cape North" but how do you
    >>>>> translate something like Bergen?
    >>>>
    >>>> The proper word is probably transliterate - change he name into something
    >>>> more palatable to the speakers of another language.
    >>> Erm...not exactly. 'Transliterate' means to represent a word from one
    >>> language in another language with a different orthographic system. This
    >>> is (most usually) done by trying to render the phonology into the target
    >>> language. However, it is highly problematic, since there is rarely a
    >>> direct correspondence even of similar sounds.
    >>
    >> Far as I can tell, that's pretty much what I said. Different words, though.
    > Sorry, but it's not. Nordkapp to North Cape is translation, not
    > transliteration, because Norwegian and English are both written using a
    > similar western so-called Roman alphabet. The point is that
    > transliteration occurs only when you have two different writing systems.
    > Chinese to English; Arabic to English; Hindi to English, etc.--these are
    > transliterations.

You can have different orthography with the same (or substantially similar)
script. Is Cardiff a "translation" of Caerdydd?

I have to confess that the dictionary is agreement with you (I looked it up;
it was going to be a devastating piece of evidence in my favor). But I am
not in agreement with it. Or I am going to claim victory on a technicality;
most European languages use different collections of characters. They may
not differ very much (an accent here; a'q' or 'w' or 'x' there) but they
do.

miguel
--
Hit The Road! Photos from 32 countries on 5 continents: http://travel.u.nu

Miguel Cruz

Henry <[email protected]> wrote:
    > Mimi <[email protected]> wrote:
    >> Is it transliteration if you're going from a hieroglyph to letters? From a
    >> pictogram to letters denoting sounds?
    > Interesting question.
    > If the pictogram can be spoken--in other words, if there is a particular
    > sound or sequence of sounds associated with the hieroglyph, then yes.
    > Do hieroglyphs constitute language? There are many languages that have
    > no written form, but it would be hard to imagine a language that can't
    > be spoken.

Sign language?

miguel
--
Hit The Road! Photos from 32 countries on 5 continents: http://travel.u.nu

Markku Grönroos

"Miguel Cruz" <[email protected]> kirjoitti viestissä
news:[email protected]...
    > Henry <[email protected]> wrote:
    > > Mimi <[email protected]> wrote:
    > >> Is it transliteration if you're going from a hieroglyph to letters?
From a
    > >> pictogram to letters denoting sounds?
    > >
    > > Interesting question.
    > >
    > > If the pictogram can be spoken--in other words, if there is a particular
    > > sound or sequence of sounds associated with the hieroglyph, then yes.
    > >
    > > Do hieroglyphs constitute language? There are many languages that have
    > > no written form, but it would be hard to imagine a language that can't
    > > be spoken.
    > Sign language?
Don't those folks speak (stir their mouths and sort of articulate) while
waving their hands (obviously mimicing those who cannot "speak" this
language).

Arwel Parry

In message <[email protected]>, B Vaughan
<[email protected]> writes
    >On Fri, 05 Nov 2004 23:39:07 GMT, devil <[email protected]> wrote:
    >>On Fri, 05 Nov 2004 19:41:07 +0200, Henry wrote:
    >>> One simple example is the name for the capital of China. In Chinese, of
    >>> course, it has always been written using the same character(s). In
    >>> English, the sounds have in the past been transliterated as Peiping,
    >>> Peking and (the currently popular one) Beijing. English speakers
    >>> pronounce these words differently, yet all are attempts to capture the
    >>> sound(s) of the _one_ Chinese name. _That_ is transliteration.
    >>I think Peiping was the name in Chinese too at that time?
    >I think it also means something different. Bei Jing means "northern
    >capital". (Nan Jing means "southern capital"). Maybe it was called
    >Peiping when it wasn't the capital.

Yes, Peiping = "northern peace". The city changed its name a bewildering
number of times in the first half of the last century -- from 1928 the
Republic of China government called it Beiping, because they'd moved
their capital to Nanjing (which is still the official ROC capital --
Taipei is only the "provisional capital"). The Japanese changed it to
Beijing because it was the capital of one of their puppet states, then
in 1945 the ROC changed it back again, and finally the communists
changed it back to Beijing in 1949 when it became their capital. The
"Beijing"/"Peking" variation is caused by different transliteration
systems, it's "Beijing" in the now-official Hanyu Pinyin system, it was
"Pei-ching" in the now-obsolete Wade-Giles system, and is still "Peking"
in Postal System Pinyin (which is only intended for postal use, not
general use).

The "Peking" name itself comes from a transliteration made by French
missionaries 400 years ago, since when there has been a sound shift in
the Mandarin language, so the 'king' has become 'jing'.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beijing and subsidiary articles have lots
of interesting information about the city, not to mention the seven ring
roads, but it's a bit off-topic for r.t.e!

--
Arwel Parry
http://www.cartref.demon.co.uk/

Henry

Miguel Cruz <[email protected]> wrote:

    > Henry <[email protected]> wrote:


    > > There are many languages that have
    > > no written form, but it would be hard to imagine a language that can't
    > > be spoken.
    >
    > Sign language?

Sign language is actually a kind of code, rather than a language per se.
It is always based on a spoken language.

cheers,

Henry

Miguel Cruz

Henry <[email protected]> wrote:
    > Miguel Cruz <[email protected]> wrote:
    >> Henry <[email protected]> wrote:
    >>> There are many languages that have
    >>> no written form, but it would be hard to imagine a language that can't
    >>> be spoken.
    >>
    >> Sign language?
    > Sign language is actually a kind of code, rather than a language per se.
    > It is always based on a spoken language.

I'm no expert, but I have heard and read on many occasions that while
British sign language is indeed a way of communicating english words and
grammar with the hands, American Sign Language is in fact a completely
different language with its own vocabulary and grammar.

miguel
--
Hit The Road! Photos from 32 countries on 5 continents: http://travel.u.nu

Hatunen

On Sat, 06 Nov 2004 11:25:26 -0600, [email protected] (Miguel Cruz)
wrote:

    >Henry <[email protected]> wrote:
    >> Miguel Cruz <[email protected]> wrote:
    >>> Henry <[email protected]> wrote:
    >>>> Miguel Cruz <[email protected]> wrote:
    >>>>> Frank F. Matthews <[email protected]> wrote:
    >>>>>> I agree & wonder just how one manages to translate a place name? What
    >>>>>> is the content that is to be translated. I'll grant that there are some
    >>>>>> "Nord Kappe" could be translated to "Cape North" but how do you
    >>>>>> translate something like Bergen?
    >>>>>
    >>>>> The proper word is probably transliterate - change he name into something
    >>>>> more palatable to the speakers of another language.
    >>>> Erm...not exactly. 'Transliterate' means to represent a word from one
    >>>> language in another language with a different orthographic system. This
    >>>> is (most usually) done by trying to render the phonology into the target
    >>>> language. However, it is highly problematic, since there is rarely a
    >>>> direct correspondence even of similar sounds.
    >>>
    >>> Far as I can tell, that's pretty much what I said. Different words, though.
    >> Sorry, but it's not. Nordkapp to North Cape is translation, not
    >> transliteration, because Norwegian and English are both written using a
    >> similar western so-called Roman alphabet. The point is that
    >> transliteration occurs only when you have two different writing systems.
    >> Chinese to English; Arabic to English; Hindi to English, etc.--these are
    >> transliterations.
    >You can have different orthography with the same (or substantially similar)
    >script. Is Cardiff a "translation" of Caerdydd?

Is "Caerdydd" the Welsh spelling for something that sounds like
"cardiff"? If so, it is a transliteration. Some languages that
use the so-called Roman alphabet use the letters with different
sounds, and transliteration might be called for for the rest of
us.

    >I have to confess that the dictionary is agreement with you (I looked it up;
    >it was going to be a devastating piece of evidence in my favor). But I am
    >not in agreement with it.

Eh? An English dictionary is descriptive, not prescriptive, and
reports the usage of a word. In other words, apparently
everyone's out of step but you.



************* DAVE HATUNEN ([email protected]) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *

Hatunen

On Sat, 6 Nov 2004 21:35:14 +0200, [email protected] (Henry)
wrote:

    >Miguel Cruz <[email protected]> wrote:
    >> Henry <[email protected]> wrote:
    >> > There are many languages that have
    >> > no written form, but it would be hard to imagine a language that can't
    >> > be spoken.
    >>
    >> Sign language?
    >Sign language is actually a kind of code, rather than a language per se.
    >It is always based on a spoken language.

Not necessarily. The need for humans to communicate is so strong
that deaf children left to their own devices may invent an entire
sign language, quite self contained. In America, two different
sign languages are in common usage: one is a set of gesgtures
which follow English usage, sort of a gestural spelling out, the
other reaally has few English referents.


************* DAVE HATUNEN ([email protected]) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *

Alan Harrison

"Hatunen" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

    > Is "Caerdydd" the Welsh spelling for something that sounds like
    > "cardiff"? If so, it is a transliteration. Some languages that
    > use the so-called Roman alphabet use the letters with different
    > sounds, and transliteration might be called for for the rest of
    > us.

No, Cardiff isn't a transliteration. An approximate transliteration would be
"Kyre-dith", with "Ky" as in "Kylie Minogue" and "th" as in "that" (not
"thing"). Welsh speakers might correct me on the second syllable, since "y"
in Welsh is frequently pronounced like a short "u".

Cardiff is a straightforward anglicised exonym like "Milan", "Florence" or
(in pronunciation) "Paris".

Anglicised Welsh names are now less common, as several places with
anglicised versions very close to Welsh (e.g. Conway/Conwy) are now almost
always given in their Welsh form. An interesting case is the seaside resort
of Barmouth, for which a Welsh name had to be made up. At one stage, buses
were going to "Y Bermo", while trains were going to "Abermaw". Logically,
one might expect the name to be Abermawddach ("estuary of the Mawddach"), of
which "Barmouth" could be an anglicised semi-translation.

Alan Harrison