 |
Apr 24, 08, 13:14 #3
1/ (Asian) Well, the language has it's economy, we never needed trascription rules for Chinese of Japanese, because our contatcs were rather very limited (in the past), so there was no need to bother. Now almost everything comes filtered through English (because any Asian business that operates internationally has to use some form of transcription to the Latin alphabet, so they do it by themselves, also I assume individuals must have some latinized verions of their names in the passports, because I can't immagine an American, or British or Polish customs/immigration officers letting those people in when they couldn't even read the person's personal data.), so I guess we'll use those forms, without having to transcript on our own. Although the Polish pronounciation will be often completely different in such cases from the intensions of the Asian part. For example the spelling Beijing is completely wrong in Polish, we do not pronounce "j" as "d¿", so it would be more confusing, maybe "Bejd¿yng", but why? We don't need a "new" name for the Chinese capital, I'm sure Pekin will remain Pekin (that's simply a traditional Polish variant, like Londyn for London, Rzym for Rome etc.).
2/ European (Slavic) The laws learning is talking about apply probably only to Slavic languages with non Latin alphabetes.
3/ European (other, Latin alphabets) About diacritic marks, they were indeed generally omitted, except maybe for the German "Umlaut" sounds (ü, ö, ä) spelled traditionally as "ue", "oe", "ae"; also this "scharfes s" spelled as "ss" (now in German as well). Today, thanks to the modern technologies, writing/printing foreign letters is much easier, so they aren't such a big problem like even 30 years ago, hence the original spelling (for example stressed vowels in French, Italian, Spanish, Czech, Slovak) will be more common, I guess.
|
Member Posts: 800
Joined: Jul 26, 07
|