James Kass scripsit:
> Does the vocabulary make things clearer or cause confusion?
> If we need to distinguish between reversible script conversion
> and irreversible script conversion, could we not simply say
> "reversible script conversion" and so forth?
No, that does not capture the distinction. In transliteration, we
are mapping one script to another in a language-independent way.
In transcription, we are mapping the writing conventions of one
language to those of another.
Handy example: the name of the country written "Myanmar" (in
transliteration) is pronounced ['b@m@]. This was transcribed
into (British) English as "Burma".
Of course, to represent the pronunciation I am using an ASCII
transliteration of IPA!
-- John Cowan cowan@ccil.org One art/there is/no less/no more/All things/to do/with sparks/galore --Douglas Hofstadter
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Fri Jul 06 2001 - 13:48:07 EDT