Re: USAGE: Help with Chinese phrase
From: | Mark Reed <markjreed@...> |
Date: | Friday, September 3, 2004, 18:59 |
MJR> But who in the heck designed Pinyin?
RB> A committee of the People's Republic of China (it was
RB> approved by the Communist National Assembly in 1958).
Ah, design by committee. That explains much. :)
RB> Gwoyeu Romatzyh (in Pinyin that would be written: guóyŭ
RB> luómăzi)
minor point - you're using breves for tone 3. I thought Pinyin used the wedge?
MJR> Some of those assignments make no sense - |r| for /z`/?
RB> Except that in the Bejing dialect the sound is retroflex [ʐ].
That's also what CXS /z`/ denotes.
RB> |r| was used this way in GY also (I'm not sure about
RB> Ladinxua).
Interesting. Is there something rhotic about that sound which I'm imissing?
RB> Yes - we can all come up with our own schemes - I've done
RB> it myself many times. But I do think one ought to leave it to
RB> the Chinese.
I have neither the desire nor the /'xUts.pa/ to replace Pinyin with a
scheme of my own devising, even in personal use; I was simply placing
myself in the role of designer to try and better understand the
choices that were made.
RB> The use of |q| BTW for [tɕh] comes from Latinxua and was
RB> adopted because lower case |q| looks vaguely like Cyrillic Ч.
That makes some sense. Thanks.
MJR> I think I'd have better luck learning Maggel. :)
RB> Rather unfair IMO - Pinyin is systematic & regular in itself.
My statement was, I thought obviously, an example of (intended-to-be)
humorous hyperbole. Nothing could be as difficult as Maggel - by
definition, IIRC. :)
Reply