| 1 |
> Our handling is simple -- we don't yet. I don't know how to handle |
| 2 |
> things like that, or the previous example of Copenhagen in different |
| 3 |
> languages. Look at Naples -- that's not what Italins call it. Venice |
| 4 |
> is really bad -- no idea how English got it so mangled. Speaking of |
| 5 |
> Japanese, their word for Mexico (last time I checked) was taken from |
| 6 |
> the English MEKS-ih-ko and comes out as may-kee-shoo-ko rather than |
| 7 |
> the more more natural may-hee-ko if they had taken it straight from |
| 8 |
> Spanish. |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
Yeah, you get all kinds of crazy. For a long time I couldn't |
| 11 |
understand why 'computer' is in katakana (ie: taken from English) and |
| 12 |
'calculus' isn't. As it turns out, the Japanese invented calculus |
| 13 |
independent of Newton and Leibniz. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
> As for ToKyo being two syllables ... I think it depends on how one |
| 16 |
> defines syllables. Ak a Japanese to pronounce three (san) slowly, and |
| 17 |
> it wil be two syllables, sa-n, "saw uhn". Ask for three hundred which |
| 18 |
> comes out as "sambyaku" because the "n" syllable changes sound when it |
| 19 |
> sounds better, and they will make quite a few syllables out of it, |
| 20 |
> such as (I am guessing now) saw-umm-bee-yaw-koo. To write Tokyo in |
| 21 |
> the proper furigana is probably something like toh-o-kee-yoh-o. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
Well, I don't think "n" is really a syllable. It's a sound, and it's |
| 24 |
the only part of the syllabary in Japanese that doesn't have a vowel. |
| 25 |
I'm not really convinced this is a syllable in reality. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
The proper way to write Tokyo for syllabary would be to-u-kyo-u I |
| 28 |
think, but I'm not certain. But really that's misleading because |
| 29 |
you're *not* supposed to pronounce the sounds twice, you just extend |
| 30 |
them, so they aren't really syllables either, they are just modifiers. |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
> |
| 33 |
>> Kyoto is the same case as Tokyo (incidentally, the Chinese |
| 34 |
>> characters for those two cities are the same and just reversed in |
| 35 |
>> order!). |
| 36 |
> |
| 37 |
> Nope -- Tokyo is 東京, east capital. Kyoto is 京都, capital city. Kyo |
| 38 |
> is the same, to is different. |
| 39 |
|
| 40 |
Huh. I wonder how the hell I came up with that? I'm convinced I did |
| 41 |
not decide that on my own but that someone told me. And they told me |
| 42 |
I'm sure because I remember the story that went with it. Very |
| 43 |
strange. But you're absolutely right. |
| 44 |
|
| 45 |
Regards, |
| 46 |
daid |
Archives