LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for ISOJAC Archives


ISOJAC Archives

ISOJAC Archives


ISOJAC@LISTSERV.LOC.GOV


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

ISOJAC Home

ISOJAC Home

ISOJAC  September 2000

ISOJAC September 2000

Subject:

Re: AW: (iso639.177) 1. Zhuang; 2. Transliteration (was: za / zha : English and French names)

From:

Håvard Hjulstad <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

ISO 639 Joint Advisory Committee <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Mon, 11 Sep 2000 11:29:45 +0200

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (132 lines)

Dear John, Dear Christian,

This is a very interesting exchange concerning
transcription/transliteration. However, I wish to draw the focus back on the
issue that I raised. It was really not about transcription, but rather about
the English and French name of one particular language. We do obviously want
to know the proper indigenous name to assess which English and French names
are most appropriate. But it may be reason to add other name forms that are
frequently found in the literature. Remember: The English and French names
(also) serve as a tool to retrieve the information; we don't standardize
English and French names here.

As far as the indigenous name is concerned, I would think that the official
romanization system should be used. So that issue is settled.

I made a quick search on AltaVista:

"zhuang" returned 13980 English documents and 149 French documents.
"chwang" returned 872 English documents and 4 French documents.
"chuang" returned 31406 English documents and 148 French documents.

However, I have not at all assessed how many of these relate to the language
in question, and how many are "noise".

It would from this seem not unlikely that both "zhuang" and "chuang" could
be candidates for inclusion as English and French names; while the former
will be the only indigenous name.

Håvard

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Håvard Hjulstad           mailto:[log in to unmask]
  Rådet for teknisk terminologi
  (Norwegian Council for Technical Terminology)
  Postboks 41 Blindern
  NO-0313  Oslo, Norway
  (besøksadresse/visiting address: Forskningsveien 3 B)
  tel: +47-23198040   faks: +47-23198041
  http://www.rtt.org/
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Clews [SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Sunday, September 10, 2000 3:52 PM
> To:   [log in to unmask]
> Subject:      Re: AW: (iso639.177) 1. Zhuang; 2. Transliteration (was: za
> / zha : English and French names)
> 
> In message <[log in to unmask]>
> Christian Galinski wrote:
> 
> > There are some more basic facts about conversion (transliteration,
> > transcription and romanization) to mention:
> >
> > (1) ISO/TC 46/SC 2 decided years ago to deal with level-1 conversion
> > (bidirectional one-to-one conversion for automatic application) first,
> and
> > then take care of level-2 conversion (i.e. more user-friendly, but
> usually
> > only unidirectional conversion) in the future.
> 
> That was largely superseded in recent years. The original decision
> led to withdrawal by some P-members from this, notably the United
> States. That original approach had several flaws in it.
> 
> 
> > The aim was to have at least
> > one harmonized system of conversion for each language/script in
> question.
> 
> Most of the ISO standards are unharmonised with each other. What
> exactly do you mean by harmonization?
> 
> > Therefore, ISO conversion tables are mostly not very user-friendly -
> which
> > was not their primary aim anyhow (and not meant as a criticism here at
> all).
> 
> And that is the reason why so few of them are used, excpet where they
> happen to use pre-existing conventions, which the most used of them
> do.
> 
> > (2) Most 'standard' conversion systems in science have a number of
> variants
> > (e.g. modified Wade-Giles or Yale or... for Chinese, modified Hepburn or
> > kunreishiki or... for Japanese etc.). Which modified version to chose?
> 
> Actually that's a red herring. This only applies to modified Hepburn
> for Japanese. No other languages have widely used "modified" forms.
> 
> In fact modified Hepburn has become the standard Hepburn in effect.
> The Japanese name - hebonshiki - does not indicate anything modified
> about it. "Modified" is now a historical anacronism as a description.
>
> > (3) In daily use - e.g. in newspapers - different conversion 'systems'
> > (often not very harmonized, nor systematic) are used in the various
> language
> > communities.
> 
> Quite often you find that they are amazingly often harmonised.
> 
> > (4) For certain applications  - e.g. maps and globes - there are other
> > commissions/committees (e.g. UN group of experts for geographical names)
> > harmonizing conversions into Latin under 'user-friendly' aspects.
> 
> Which have proved the most useful in this regard. ISO standards have
> generally nothing to add to the work of UNGEGN.
> 
> > ISO/TC 46/SC 2 still has work in abundance with respect to the
> > standardization/harmonization of all that - whenever it is
> > necessary/suitable to harmonize.
> 
> If there is work in abundance to do, I hope that Austria will get far
> more involved than it has been. ONORM supplied an excellent
> Secretariat, until funding crises obliged them to give it up, when
> ELOT stepped in, but technical input from Austria has been minimal
> otherwise.
> 
> Best regards
> 
> John Clews
> 
> --
> John Clews, SESAME Computer Projects, 8 Avenue Rd, Harrogate, HG2 7PG
> tel: +44 1423 888 432; fax: + 44 1423 889061;
> Email: [log in to unmask]
> 
> Committee Chair of  ISO/TC46/SC2: Conversion of Written Languages;
> Committee Member of ISO/IEC/JTC1/SC22/WG20: Internationalization;
> Committee Member of the Foundation for Endangered Languages;
> Committee Member of ISO/TC37: Terminology)

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

April 2021
January 2021
November 2020
June 2020
May 2019
February 2019
September 2018
April 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
May 2016
April 2016
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
May 2013
April 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003
December 2002
November 2002
October 2002
September 2002
August 2002
July 2002
June 2002
May 2002
April 2002
March 2002
February 2002
January 2002
December 2001
November 2001
October 2001
September 2001
August 2001
July 2001
June 2001
April 2001
March 2001
February 2001
January 2001
December 2000
November 2000
October 2000
September 2000
August 2000
July 2000
June 2000
May 2000
April 2000
March 2000
February 2000
January 2000

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.LOC.GOV

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager