Message-Id: <m0qVFaw-000023C@xiron.pc.helsinki.fi>
Date:         Tue, 2 Aug 1994 04:51:03 -0400
Reply-To:     Logical Language Group <lojbab@ACCESS.DIGEX.NET>
Sender:       Lojban list <LOJBAN%CUVMB.bitnet@FINHUTC.hut.fi>
From:         Logical Language Group <lojbab@ACCESS.DIGEX.NET>
Subject:      Re: Lojbanizing umlaut
To:           Veijo Vilva <veion@XIRON.PC.HELSINKI.FI>
Content-Length: 4110
Lines: 84

LL> > 1) when in doubt, follow the spelling - linguists are of-ten (emphasis on
LL> > non-silent 't') wrong about language and its nature  (Gary is a professio
LL> > linguist, i.e. translator, for the US Air Force).
LL>
LL> But the doubt had better be a substantial, informed doubt.

Look, If I have need to Lojbanize and use a word from Georgian, whose
phonoilogy I know from nothing, I will probably rely on the transliterated
spelling.  When Erik Rauch, who knows enough about German to talk about its
multiple standard froms and to talk about "my dialect", says that he isn't
sure because he makes final 'g' as a fricative, but others may not, we are
dealing with informed doubt.  Maybe a professional linguist trained in
German phonology might make a more informed choice, but if educated native
or near-native speakers are uncertain, that ought to be true for us as well.

LL> > 3) Use diphthongs to trnascribe these, possibly "ui" for u: and "oi" for
LL>
LL> Gag.  Goethe as Geute [goit@]?  Unspeakable.

I don't see why it is more unspeakable than [got@] or [get@]. To my untrained
ear, o and u umlaut sound close to alike, though, so I am no judge.

LL> > For people where this isn't possible (dead ones, etc.)
LL> > and for places of uncertain pronunciation,
LL>
LL> What "places of uncertain pronunciation"?  There are places whose names
LL> have more than one pronunciation, certainly (New Orleans, e.g.), and there
LL> are names of whose pronunciation some Lojbanist may not be certain (I only
LL> found out the other day how to pronounce "Otranto", the name of a city in
LL> Italy), but these are two separate issues.

For an uninformed Chinese Lojbanist, Otranto and New Orleans are the same
problem, except that we will have one (at least) in the dictionary for
the latter.

But when we turn to pronunciation of dead languages, we REALLY are uncertain.
Moreover, we are uncertain what standard to use (do we use Vulgar Latin or
book Latin, and from what era, to determine the pronunciation of various
Roman provinces)?

I don't intend to require every Lojbanist to become a master of the world's
phonologies, past and present.  So when in doubt relying on spelling is not
a bad idea for dealing with a name you don't know.  And recognizing that the
average Lojbanist will do that, the knowledgeable Lojbanist who is devising
a Lojban name based on multiple 'legitimate' pronunciations, probably should
choose the one that will match most closely with what the unknowledgeable
Lojbanist will choose - after all, they might end up talking to each other %^)

LL> >  and usage or input
LL> > from a local native speaker will decide which one sticks for the long ter
LL>
LL> The latter, we hope, not the former.  Yet native speakers aren't
LL> infallible guides to their own phonology, either, witness the various
LL> Chinese-speakers on sci.lang who insist that English /b/ = Chinese /b/,
LL> despite the fact that the former is usually voiced and the latter usually
LL> isn't.

Fine, but who am >I< to argue with that native speaker.  If he likes the sound
of his name transliterated with 'b' instead of 'p', then I would say that he
is correct.  When Ken Shan the other day tried to Lojbanize his native
Taipei and did not know whether to use 'b' or 'p', then I have to say: use 'p'
if they sound more-or-less equal to you, since that is the spelling, otherwise,
he as a native speaker should feel free to choose what sounds best -EVEN IF
what he chooses may be less close to the linguist-evaluated sound..

LL> Except that by that time it may be too late, and we will be stuck with
LL> monstrosities like Eng. "Leghorn" = It. "Livorno".
LL>

But we won't. at least for languages with written Romanizations.  The worst
probalme we will have is likely to be with native English, when we try to
Lojbanize "Worchestershire" %^)

Would we be offensively wrong to pronounce "Otranto" as "la otranton."?

Or is it as bad as Leghorn?

LL> I do realize we can only do the best
LL> we can.

That is all we can ever do.  A few weeks of dictionary work is enough to
convince me of this permanently.

lojbab