On Thu, 24 Jan 2002, Patrick Andries wrote:
> John Cowan wrote:
> >Patrick Andries scripsit:
> >>Let's assume I want to "transliterate" a large Wade-Giles database into
> >>pinyin. It this a purely algorithmic process? For all nouns ? Common and
> >>proper (cf. Chiang Kai-Shek vs Jiang Jeshi )? Even for "dialectal" words?
> >
> >"Chiang Kai-Shek" isn't Wade-Giles; it isn't even Mandarin.
>
> I did mention "dialectal" forms (I believe final -k does no longer occur
> in Mandarin), I just wondered whether I would find such nouns (proper or
> common) in dictionary edited in Taiwan. I asked because I could see no
> algorithmic way of converting this name using traditional Wade to Pinyin
> tables.
>
> Incidentally, if this is not Wade-Giles applied to a "dialectal"
> pronunciation, what is it? Geniously interested.
It should be noted that "Wade-Giles" is commonly misused as a cover term
for many old, ad hoc, non-Mandarin-based, or non-Pinyin romanization
systems.
"Chiang Kai-shek" is a mixture of what looks like Wade-Giles (surname
"CHIANG") and some kind of archaic romanization based on Cantonese (given
name "Kai-shek"). For placenames, there are many "postal" romanizations
that are often erroneously considered to be Wade-Giles, e.g., the city
Nanking (postal)/Nan-ching (Wade-Giles)/Nanjing (Pinyin).
In any case, one should also beware of degenerate Wade-Giles forms where
details such as apostrophes (denoting aspiration) are omitted, e.g., the
city "Changchun" (degenerate Wade-Giles)/"Ch'ang-ch'un"
(Wade-Giles)/Changchun (Pinyin). If "Changchun" were accepted as proper
Wade-Giles input, then a corrupt *Zhangzhun pinyin form would be
generated.
Thomas Chan
tc31@cornell.edu
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Fri Jan 25 2002 - 08:35:59 EST