Re: A BrSc a? & Nyuu Romaji

John Cowan writes:
 > Tim May scripsit:
 >
 > >  > I can't quite tell if you realize that "Myanmar" is pronounced ['b@m@].
 > > Are you _certain_ about this?  Everything I can find contradicts it.
 >
 > The spelling "Burma(h)" is a transcription of the sound of the native
 > word using (British) English conventions.  The spelling "Myanmar" is
 > a letter-by-letter transliteration of the script into Latin script.
 > The underlying sound is the same.  Doubtless some people say
 > /mjanmar/ or /majanmar/ or the like, but they are wrong just the same.
 >



I'm sorry to saund dubious, and I can certainly imagine such a
situation, but there seem to be hundreds of references online which
say "Myanmar (pronounced myahn-mah)" or the like, and I can't find any
which say ~"Myanmar (pronounced burma)".  Are you absolutely sure that
it's never pronounced Myanmar indigenously?  Perhaps in formal speech,
or something of the kind?  The following reference is perhaps
consistent with such an interpretation.

http://www.rainbow2.com/burma/suggestions.htm

The following also suggests that Myanmar is pronounced locally,
although it could conceivably be referring only to the written form.
http://workers.labor.net.au/106/d_review_silence.html
(As most of this article is irrelevant, I've quoted the section below)



"To recognize other voices besides that of the military regime, I have
followed the pro-democracy movement in using Burma rather than
Myanmar. Although in Burmese 'Bama' and 'Myanma' are used
interchangeably for the name of the country, the choice of names in
English has political connotations."



The CIA world factbook says:


 Country name:
    conventional long form:  Union of Burma

    conventional short form:  Burma

    local long form: Pyidaungzu Myanma Naingngandaw (translated by the
                     US Government as Union of Myanma and by the
                     Burmese as Union of Myanmar)

    local short form:  Myanma Naingngandaw

    former:  Socialist Republic of the Union of Burma

Now, this says nothing about pronunciation, but to my mind it doesn't
support your assertion.  If "Myanmar" is purely the result of direct
transliteration, how can a contrast between "Myanma" and "Myanmar"
exist?


My apologies for showing such a lack of faith in your statement, but I
just can't accept this without some kind of corroboration.  It just
seems that if such a peculiar situation existed, it should be fairly
easy to find a reference to it online, and I can't.  Do you know of
such a reference?  Please?

 > > http://www.infoplease.com/ce6/world/A0834629.html
 >
 > This article says "Myanmar or Burma" and gives the pron. "bu^rmu"
 > where the last u is italic, presumably representing a schwa.
 > Note that the same thing is done with "Yangon formerly Rangoon", the
 > capital, pron. "rang-GOON".
 >
 > > http://www.bartleby.com/61/60/M0506050.html
 >
 > This is the AHD, which is probably reflecting the incorrect pron.
 > If people read "Livorno" and say "Leghorn", a dictionary must say so.
 >