> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On
> Behalf Of John H. Jenkins
> æ Jul 2, 2004 11:17 AM æïChris Harvey æåï
>
> > Perhaps one could think of "Ha Tinh" as the English word
> for the city,
> > like "Rome" (English) for "Roma" (Italian), or Tokyo (English) for
> > "TÅkyÅ" (English transliteration of Japanese), or Kahnawake
> > (English/French) for KahnawÃ:ke (Mohawk).
>
> Or Peking for BeÇjÄng. :-)
Or either of those for åä? Hmmm - can't really transcribe åä, now can we? After all, it doesn't have a definitive pronunciation, various government mandates aside. We can only transcribe pronunciation, not spelling. And isn't that the real difference? I always thought it was. Transcribing is making sounds readable, whereas transliteration is making letters familiar, yes?
I think this is a bit of a Rorshach, though - I doubt any definition or definitons would well cover all the available ground.
/|/|ike
