From Ti@fa-kuan.muc.de Wed Aug 15 05:31:14 2001 Return-Path: X-Sender: Ti@fa-kuan.muc.de X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_3_1); 15 Aug 2001 12:31:13 -0000 Received: (qmail 55961 invoked from network); 15 Aug 2001 12:31:12 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by m8.onelist.org with QMQP; 15 Aug 2001 12:31:12 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO n18.groups.yahoo.com) (10.1.1.37) by mta1 with SMTP; 15 Aug 2001 12:31:12 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: Ti@fa-kuan.muc.de Received: from [10.1.10.122] by mr.egroups.com with NNFMP; 15 Aug 2001 12:31:11 -0000 Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2001 12:31:09 -0000 To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: Transliterations survey Message-ID: <9ldq2d+kurh@eGroups.com> In-Reply-To: User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Length: 4449 X-Mailer: eGroups Message Poster X-Originating-IP: 62.104.218.72 From: "A.W.T." --- In lojban@y..., Andrew Smith wrote: >=20 > On Tue, 14 Aug 2001, A.W.T. wrote: >=20 > > --- In lojban@y..., Andrew Smith wrote: > > > As far as I know, when the Hungarians reformed their spelling system > > > sometime last century, names were exempted, and so are still spelt us= =3D=0D ing > > > the old rules. > > >=20 > > > So the name Ra'koczi stayed as it is, but czukor (sugar) became cukor= =3D=0D . > > > Likewise Eo"tvo"s and Eszterha'zy. > >=20 > > This is correct: "cz" {ts} shifted to "c" (cz=E1r->c=E1r) whereas "cs" = and =3D=0D "sz=3D > > " {tc/s} remained unaltered (cs=E1sz=E1r=3Demperor). > > "Czukor", common Jewish-Hungarian surname remained (cukor=3Dsugar). So = pa=3D=0D rtly=3D > > did "We=F6r=F6s" (v=F6r=F6s=3Dblue-ish red). >=20 > Interesting that vo"ro"s is blue-ish red - I learnt it as being a deeper > red than piros rather than bluer. So the Hungarian flag is > piros-fehe'r-zo"ld (red-white-green), but the Soviet (red) army was the > vo"ro"s hadsereg. This indeed might be highly subjective: I prefer the beautiful "piros" (wha= =3D=0D t I see as a yellowish-red) of "Piroska": it's the colour=20 of Hungarian culture and folklore. (Don't forget communist "V=F6r=F6s Csill= ag" =3D=0D etc.- for me, this is not a question of hue but of=20 quality.) BTW, the surname is (often) "We=F6res" (not "We=F6r=F6s" as I mis-spelled i= t) > > "T=F3oth" now usually is "T=F3th" (not unlike in Danish "aa" -> "=E5");= the "=3D=0D th" =3D > > has become simple "t". > > BTW, E=F6tv=F6s is the name of a well-known "gimn=E1zium" in lovely Tat= a. > > The final "-y" or "-yi" {ii} usually is an indicator for nobility (in a= =3D=0D loc=3D > > ative function), like in "B=E1t(t)y=E1nyi" - not too=20 > > comparable, though, to German "Kissinger" as "the one from Kissingen/Fr= =3D=0D anko=3D > > nia" ;-) >=20 > Is that just the same as the -i ending now, then, like pesti (from Pest) > or even londoni (from London)? Yes, I think so. (If you look at the first text written in Hungarian langua= =3D=0D ge, you'll realize the change in orthography: something like=20 "... tudmuk [hogy csak por =E9s] ham=FA vagmuk..." (sorry, don't have this = reli=3D=0D gious text at hand). Yet, this "-i" in general isn't a locative, but something functioning like = =3D=0D modern Putonghua "de/di": "itteni" (related to here),=20 "ottani" (related to there), "helybeli" (related to 'in this place') both h= =3D=0D aving a locative meaning, but also: "mostani" (related to=20 now/this moment), "jelenlegi" (related to the present), "mai" (related to '= =3D=0D today') etc. etc. =20 > > How do you pronounce "Rothschild"?; in German it is still {ro:tcilt} ("= =3D=0D roth=3D > > " was the former spelling for "rot", which is "red").=20 > As an English speaker in Britain, I pronounce Rothschild as > something like [rOTstSajld], wherr The German branch pronounces the name as {ro:t.cilt} (=3DRedshield). =20 > Basically, as a rule of thumb, English speakers tend to mangle foreign > names by pronouncing them as if they were English until anyone tells them= =3D=0D > different. There's also a lot of hyper-correction, where someone uses a > `foreign' pronunciation of a letter, but from the wrong language. I remember a classmate speaking of {tcinemaskope} (cinemascope). > During the Falklands war 20 years ago (was it really that long ago?)... My thought, before reading your bracketed remark! > the Argentine government was routinely referred to as the military junta = =3D=0D - the > finally word obviously just the Spanish word. At first, it was pronounced= =3D=0D > on the television news as [dZunta] as if it was an English word, then > people tried to make it more foreign-sounding, so changed to [junta], wit= =3D=0D h > a glide like English y. Spanish speakers, of course, used [xunta], so whe= =3D=0D n > this was realised, thae news changed again, this time to [hunta], avoidin= =3D=0D g > the [x]. In the end there was no consensus, and the same person would use= =3D=0D > two or more pronunciations. In Germany [hunta] is pretty wide-spread, but it's mainly {xunta}. (This is= =3D=0D quite natural, since half of German population is living=20 in Spain or Mallorca ;-); but hear them pronounce Hungarian, Romanian or Ch= =3D=0D inese!!!) As for lojbanizing "magyar": What about learning from Gypsies, who are quit= =3D=0D e skilled with adapting/incorporating foreign=20 vocabulary to their language?! They say "mandj=E1ri". Isn't this pretty loj= ba=3D=0D nic? Or: "unguro"; pl. "ungarja" {.ungaria.} (expression=20 for all the kaldarash gypsies in France.) mu'o mi'e .aulun.