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