[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]

Re: Mongolian Transcription

>   There are plenty of double "ii" and "nn" in Russian lit to work around
> this.

Most of the nn are where two n happen to meet because of grammar. The ii just 
look that way, in reality they're yiyi, a stem ending in -iy plus the 
grammatical ending -i... ever seen a Serbocroatian text? Plenty of iji in 
there in these places.

> Translating as I am some older Russian works, its very obvious that
> lately the trend has been to replace the second sound in a vowel sequence
> with a different character, but its pronounced the same all the way.

Please explain. All I know is that ii never appears in Cyrillic Mongolian, 
probably because of the abovementioned reason, instead they use iy, and for 
me there's no way to tell if this has any reality in the Mongolian language 
or is just orthography.

> <-baatar. *Tarbosaurus*-or-not *bataar* has it the wrong way around. Bator
> is Russianized... in Russian unstressed o is pronounced something like
> English uh, so it's good to use for a short ah. Ulan Bator is Russianized
> for Ulaanbaatar.>
>   I don't want to get in an argument with this one. There is no one
> correct way to transcribe Mongolian orthography in English; its all
> relative to the language you speak or the various books you read.

Well. I'm not talking of English. I'm talking about the Latin alphabet in 
general. :-) And in the 1920s to 40s (when Stalin stopped this), Mongolia did 
use a Latin alphabet! I've never seen it, though. I have no idea what it 
looked like.
        Regarding this special case: In Caps Lock, without the first letter, 
AATAP in Cyrillic. There can't be much of a debate here, I think. :-) (The 
first letter is the Cyrillic B, a B without the upper ")" but with the upper 
"-".) I could waffle on end about how to write sounds like sh or ch, or what 
to do with the last letter of Ömnögov_, but baatar is dead obvious.

> it is clear that it requires
> outside authorities to make their own way when transcribing languages
> whose written form has no actual "alphabet".

Mongolian has had 3 actual alphabets in its history: Mongolian, Latin and 
Cyrillic. :-)

> Sop we get various forms of
> writing Chinese, Japanese is not as difficult, but even Greek and Russian
> transcription is not all that easy, and this is into _English_.

Why into English? What for? Pinyin is not into English.

> I have no
> idea what lit is being compiled in Romania on transcribing French names,

Do they do that?

> and this should be one caution on accepting systems of transcribing
> non-orthographed languages. Like Mongolian.

Mongolian has also had 3 orthographies in its history, one per script. :-)

> The practices of the American authors is to follow "bataar"
>  as is common in Mongolian multituberculate names,

And there you have it. All those multi names, including *Ameribaatar* and 
*Albionbaatar*, have the aa in front. *T. bataar* is an isolated case of 
institutionalized misspelling. *Sloanbaatar*, *Bulganbaatar 
nemegtbaataroides*, *Kryptobaatar*, *Tugrigbaatar* (from Tögrögiyn shiree, I 
assume), *Kamptobaatar*, *Chulsanbaatar*, *Nemegtbaatar*, *Buginbaatar* (from 
Bügiyn tsav), all these are listed the 1992 book with the Mongolian map, 
without one deviation in the usage of aa. And of course in that map it says 
Ulaanbaatar in Cyrillic.