Transcription does not require roundtrip. It is intended in this case for the English speaker to be able to deliver an approximate pronunciation adapted to his native vocal capabilities.
And with the availability of Unicode, I think the need for transliteration is fading. It seems that these schemes can only be used by people who know the transliterated script. Jony -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mike Ayers Sent: Friday, July 02, 2004 8:24 PM To: 'Mark Davis'; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Looking for transcription or transliteration standards latin- >arabic > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Behalf Of Mark Davis > Sent: Friday, July 02, 2004 8:36 AM > Note: I am still speaking of transliterations (e.g. > transformations that > 'roundtrip'), not transcriptions (which try to match the > pronunciation more > precisely, and may lose information). OK, just because I do so love monkey wrenches, please explain what I found in my atlas: Vietnamese English ------> Hà Tĩnh Ha Tinh In which we have a trancription/transliteration/taxonomy problem between Latin and Latin. Since this does not remotely roundtrip (Ha, for instance, has 18 Vietnamese equivalents), and no attempt is made to match pronunciation, how do we refer to it? /|/|ike Trivia question: Which Vietnamese city does my atlas spell correctly, much to the chagrin of the Vietnamese?
