Re: Beijing, Zhongguo, etc. (was Re: 'out-' affix in conlangs?)

ObConculture:
What kind of benchmark do you with concultures use for determining the
source language for a foreign country's name? I'm vacillating between a dose
of realism and easy standardisation.

What I mean is, the Areth aren't supposed to "know" Earth, but if they do
it'd be through English-speaking visiting explorers (or some such). The easy
way would be to standardise the Arithide names for Earthling place names
either all English-derived or original language-derived, but realistically,
the most significant countries (from the perspectives of the "explorers",
wherever they came from and wherever their allegiances lay) would be
contributed in English whereas those known of only later would probably have
their names derived from Lingala or any other language they spoke (due to
things like an increased familiarity with the diversity of Eartling
languages).

Some potential dilemmas include names like Algeria ([aldzeria], [aldze] or
[aldzajr]? Maybe even [dzejer] from the Amazigh) and Egypt ([i:dzipt],
[ajgyptas], [kemet], [ki:mi], [mi:sur] or [ma:sur]?).

There is also an idea I was considering, and wondering if ANADEW: what if
foreign place names were kept in as close a form as possible to their source
language, not being altered to fit declension patterns in the nominative,
only tacking on the appropriate case endings in the other cases?

E.g. Īzipt ['i:dzipt] would normally be a declension V noun and have the
accusative _Īziptor_, but because it is a foreign place name takes the
declension II accusative ending instead to give _Īzipta_.

Eugene

On Wed, Aug 13, 2008 at 12:10 PM, Herman Miller <hmiller@...> wrote:

> Herman Miller wrote:
>
>>
>> I've been thinking about "Beijing" for some reason lately :-) and ended up
>> calling it Beĭżiñ-vor ['bejdz\iN,vOr] in Tirelat, ta-Beidžiŋ [ta'bejd`z`iN]
>> in Minza. The /ż/ in Tirelat is typically [dz] but the following /i/ causes
>> it to be palatalized, so it's a good match for the Chinese [ts\]. That would
>> also work for "Jim" Żim ['dz\im], although "John" Żaan ['dza:n] is less
>> recognizable. Žaan ['Za:n] is another possibility. (That's for an American
>> "John" -- an English "John" would be Żon or Žon.) I could always write Džaan
>> or Džon, although /dž/ is not a sequence that occurs in Tirelat.
>>
>>
> I looked at an older document and found that I already have a Tirelat
> version of Beijing: it was Beĭżiiŋ ['bejdz\i:N]. I think my intention with
> the long vowel must have been to put the stress on the second syllable, but
> according to the stress rules on the Tirelat web page, the first syllable
> gets the stress. (I may want to reexamine the Tirelat stress rules.)
>
> I also noticed that ż /dz/ is the typical equivalent of English /dZ/ as in
> Java (Żava), Georgia (the U.S. state, Żorża), and Jamaica (Żameĭka). So if I
> were to borrow the Chinese name for China (Zhōngguó), a good approximation
> would be Żuñgŭo-vor.
>

Reply