Re: [unicode] kJapaneseOn and kJapaneseKun Use What Romanization Standard?

From: Ed Trager (ed.trager@gmail.com)
Date: Sun Jan 24 2010 - 16:05:19 CST

  • Next message: Christoph Burgmer: "Re: [unicode] kJapaneseOn and kJapaneseKun Use What Romanization Standard?"

    On Sun, Jan 24, 2010 at 2:01 PM, <mpsuzuki@hiroshima-u.ac.jp> wrote:
    > Hi,
    >
    > It seems that different styles are mixed. I'm not sure
    > Hepburn style is dominant or Kunrei style is dominant.
    >

    ... Oh, that is not good ...

    So would I be correct to assume that I cannot automatically convert
    the kJapaneseOn and kJapaneseKun fields from romanization into kana?
    I was hoping that I could just write a quick tool in Perl or something
    to map to hiragana ...

    > * Kunrei style
    > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kunrei-shiki_R%C5%8Dmaji
    > * Hepburn style
    > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hepburn_romanization
    >
    > For example, when you compare popular difference
    > "SY" (Kunrei) vs "SH" (Hepburn), "SH" is dominant
    > in Unihan.txt. On the other hand, when you compare
    > "HU" (Kunrei) vs "FU" (Hepburn), the difference is
    > not clear. I'm not sure if there is any rule.
    >
    > I think, the original data of kJapanese{On,Kun} is
    > non-modernized style (for modernized style, see
    > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern_kana_usage
    > ) that have many different pronunciations between
    > context level and character level. Giving kJapanese{On,Kun}
    > data to some speech synthesizer, the result would be
    > different of the pronunciation that the author of
    > the original data expected.
    >
    > Regards,
    > mpsuzuki
    >
    > On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 12:59:13 -0500
    > Ed Trager <ed.trager@gmail.com> wrote:
    >
    >>Quick question:
    >>
    >>What is the romanization system used for kJapaneseOn and kJapaneseKun
    >>readings in the Unihan_Readings database?
    >>
    >>I think that UAX#38 does not say ...
    >>
    >>Best - Ed
    >>
    >



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun Jan 24 2010 - 16:09:16 CST