てんどうりゅうじ wrote:
>
> We ought to try to avoid twisting language, even if we do pretty much operate within
>our own little techie world here.
Indeed! Or, at least if we need a correct definition of
an English word, we should consult an English dictionary.
The web page cited by Mr. Constable is simply misleading, unless
it were to be amended to clearly state "for the purposes of
this and related documents..." these words mean &c.
Languages change over time and so do the definitions of words
or phrases within a language. "Blind pig" meant something
other than a sightless farm critter in the 1920s and '30s, for
example, and my guess is that a larger percentage of subscribers
to this list would recognize that term than the average ranihan
on the streets. (Hope ranihan is spelled correctly, for some
reason it isn't in the paperback Webster's here.)
No international body has any authority to alter the meaning of
existing words in my language or any of our languages.
>
> Still haven't got the multiplication riddle solved, Mr. Kass?
>
Sorry, I didn't know it was required. Almost asked 'which
riddle?', but now notice the "×" in the signature portion as
follows...
>
> らんま
> ×あかね
> ーーーーー
> あまんけ
> ねけあず
> らんま
> ーーーーー
> いいなずけ
>
So, here goes with a transliteration...
ranma
× akane
---------
amanke
nekeazu
ranma
--------
iinazuke
Japanese class was a long time ago...
"Colloquial Japanese" by Noboru Inamoto doesn't include any
of these words in the vocabulary list. "Easy Japanese" by
Samuel E. Martin doesn't list them in PART IV 3000 Useful
Japanese Words, either. (But, the Japanese word for "riddle"
is "nazo".) Surely there are better references around here
somewhere, but your CD collection is probably better
organized than my books at present.
If the riddle is a Japanese cryptogram, there is little hope
for me.
Has anyone solved the riddle, てんどうりゅうじ-san ? (Besides
Sarasvati, who probably figured it out at once.) Perhaps you
will take some sake, become magnanimous, and enlighten us?
Back on topic, with regards to the terminology... The page
in question ( http://www.elot.gr/tc46sc2/purpose.html )
uses the word "transcription" where the word "transliteration"
should be, and what they call "transliteration" could easily be
referred to as "reversible transliteration" in plain English,
without 'breaking existing applications' like my dictionary.
English is too complicated already, let's not make it more complex.
Back off topic...
> PTKA IZGT F SFNNGYGB ZRMSFTB WM
> NFEGT FM MGYWPRMKA FM F SFNNGYGB IWOG
> IWKK QGT FT IPQGT ZFXG GHRFK YWJZNM.
Only when a battered husband is
taken as seriously as a battered wife
will men an women have equal rights.
The typo in the third line threw me off for a moment...
Best regards,
James Kass.
