----- Original Message ----
From: Nathaniel Krause <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: lojban-beginners@lojban.org
Sent: Saturday, January 5, 2008 2:17:14 PM
Subject: [lojban-beginners] Re: towns and countries
My general impression is that Lojban always (almost always?) prefers to
transcribe (as closely as possible in Lojban phonology) names from the local
pronunciation. Attempting to approximately transliterate the local spelling
wouldn't be a crazy idea, but I don't recall noticing it done (on the other
hand, maybe I have seen it but I assumed it was an error).
Places with varying local names do present a problem in this scheme, which I
don't have a catch-all solution for. In the case of Belgium, I use {belgik},
from the Latin root which is the common source of the French and Flemish names.
In the case of Korea, I use {gorios}, from an archaic local name (therefore
less controversial, I think), which is also the root of the country's
"international" name. I don't have a satisfying solution for Jerusalem/al-Quds.
My initial suggestion would be to look which name is more widely-used in the
rest of the world, and also at which name is older; this would tend to favour a
Lojbanisation based on "Jersusalem". You might also try some sort of historical
or etymological name.
Which brings up the problem, once again, of India which is {xingu'e} in
jbovlaste (I'm only mentioning it again as someone new may bring some
enlightenment). This name is based on the gismu for Hindi (the language of much
of northern India and one of the two - along with English - official languages.
Most people in southern India, who do not speak Hindi, would probably object to
this identification.
mu'o mi'e andrus
