Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Japanese Mode?

Expand Messages
  • j_mach_wust
    Hisilome wrote: ... ... That s what I d say. There is already a relation between the signs for /t/ and /d/ if we represent them with tinco and ando. You could
    Message 1 of 9 , Mar 19, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      Hisilome wrote:
      ...
      > The interesting thing is, since, as I wrote, "b, p" are
      > written with the same signs used in the "ha"-series...with the
      > daku-ten (for "b" sounds) or a maru (aka handaku-ten) (for "p"
      > sounds) added at the top right, this, as you also point out,
      > makes "b", at least in writing, the voiced counterpart of "h" in
      > Japanese (not of "p"), so we have: k/g, s/z, t/d, h/b--where does
      > that leave "p", the "semi-voiced" sound, and how would one fit it
      > into the tengwar system?
      > Or maybe one shouldn't worry about this, and simply use hyarmen,
      > umbar and parma, anyway... ]
      ...

      That's what I'd say. There is already a relation between the signs for
      /t/ and /d/ if we represent them with tinco and ando. You could
      consider the doubling of the bow a kind of daku-ten (I hope I don't
      mix up things), though I don't see a straightforward representation of
      the relation between /p/, /b/ and /h/.

      Anyway, I think the following two problems are even more important:

      What to do with loanword syllables such as "ti" or "tsi"? If we use
      tinco for all of "ta chi tsu te to", then these are problematic. If we
      use tinco only for "ta ti tu te to", then the natural sound system of
      Japanese is broken.

      How to represent the Japanese pitch accent (if at all)?

      ---------------------------
      j. 'mach' wust
      http://machhezan.tripod.com
      ---------------------------
    • Melroch 'Aestan
      ... I agree. No need to mess up the principles of Tengwar where they are analogous, just because they are not identical. ... Historically _h_ is derived from
      Message 2 of 9 , Mar 19, 2006
      • 0 Attachment
        j_mach_wust skrev:
        > Hisilome wrote:
        > ...
        >
        >>The interesting thing is, since, as I wrote, "b, p" are
        >>written with the same signs used in the "ha"-series...with the
        >>daku-ten (for "b" sounds) or a maru (aka handaku-ten) (for "p"
        >>sounds) added at the top right, this, as you also point out,
        >>makes "b", at least in writing, the voiced counterpart of "h" in
        >>Japanese (not of "p"), so we have: k/g, s/z, t/d, h/b--where does
        >>that leave "p", the "semi-voiced" sound, and how would one fit it
        >>into the tengwar system?
        >>Or maybe one shouldn't worry about this, and simply use hyarmen,
        >>umbar and parma, anyway... ]
        >
        > ...
        >
        > That's what I'd say. There is already a relation between the signs for
        > /t/ and /d/ if we represent them with tinco and ando. You could
        > consider the doubling of the bow a kind of daku-ten (I hope I don't

        I agree. No need to mess up the principles of Tengwar where
        they are analogous, just because they are not identical.

        > mix up things), though I don't see a straightforward representation of
        > the relation between /p/, /b/ and /h/.

        Historically _h_ is derived from *f (actually *[p\])
        which in turn is derived from *p rather than the other
        way around, so the most straightforward way would be to
        use Formen for _f_ -- with w-tehta as a diacritic when
        _f_ occurs before vowels other than _u_ and under-dot when _h_
        occurs before _u_. C.f. _huzi/fuji_ which is said to be
        cognate to Korean _phulson_!

        > Anyway, I think the following two problems are even more important:
        >
        > What to do with loanword syllables such as "ti" or "tsi"? If we use
        > tinco for all of "ta chi tsu te to", then these are problematic. If we
        > use tinco only for "ta ti tu te to", then the natural sound system of
        > Japanese is broken.

        I suggest using the underdot as a general diacritic for
        "foreign" pronunciation, thus having an underdot on _ti_
        to distinguish it from _chi_. The Calmatéma should of
        course not be used at all...

        > How to represent the Japanese pitch accent (if at all)?

        Well, since the Japanese, as well as common Romanization,
        usually don't indicate it it should probably be dispensed
        with. Imagine having to look up every word in a pronunciation
        dictionary in order to write something in Tengwar! I've actually
        done that in the course of writing English phonemically...

        --

        /BP 8^)>
        --
        Benct Philip Jonsson -- melroch at melroch dot se
        ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~__
        A h-ammen ledin i phith! \ \
        __ ____ ____ _____________ ____ __ __ __ / /
        \ \/___ \\__ \ /___ _____/\ \\__ \\ \ \ \\ \ / /
        / / / / / \ / /Melroch\ \_/ // / / // / / /
        / /___/ /_ / /\ \ / /Roccondil\_ // /__/ // /__/ /
        /_________//_/ \_\/ /Eowine __ / / \___/\_\\___/\_\
        Gwaedhvenn Angeliniel\ \______/ /a/ /_h-adar Merthol naun
        ~~~~~~~~~Kuinondil~~~\________/~~\__/~~~Noolendur~~~~~~
        || Lenda lenda pellalenda pellatellenda kuivie aiya! ||
        "A coincidence, as we say in Middle-Earth" (JRR Tolkien)
      • hisilome
        ... [ Yes, for t/d and k/g, things would be quite neat . So maybe: k = quesse g = ungwe s = silme (?) z = aaze (?) t = tinco d = ando n = nuumen h = hyarmen p
        Message 3 of 9 , Mar 19, 2006
        • 0 Attachment
          --- In elfscript@yahoogroups.com, "j_mach_wust" <j_mach_wust@...>
          wrote:

          > Hisilome wrote:

          >...We have: k/g, s/z, t/d, h/b--where does
          > > that leave "p", the "semi-voiced" sound, and how would one fit
          >it into the tengwar system?
          > > Or maybe one shouldn't worry about this, and simply use hyarmen,
          > > umbar and parma, anyway... ]
          > ...
          >
          > That's what I'd say. There is already a relation between the signs
          >for /t/ and /d/ if we represent them with tinco and ando. You could
          > consider the doubling of the bow a kind of daku-ten (I hope I don't
          > mix up things), though I don't see a straightforward
          >representation of the relation between /p/, /b/ and /h/.

          [ Yes, for t/d and k/g, things would be quite "neat".
          So maybe:

          k = quesse
          g = ungwe
          s = silme (?)
          z = aaze (?)
          t = tinco
          d = ando
          n = nuumen
          h = hyarmen
          p = parma
          b = umbar
          m = nuumen
          y = anna (?)
          r = roomen (Japanese "r" is really a flap I think [akin to
          Spanish "r"], at the same time bearing some similarity to the
          English "l" [though the latter is of course a continuant]), so
          roomen should be better than oore I guess)
          w = vala (basically like English "w", yet a bit "softer" I'd say)

          For palatalization, one could probably use the double under-dots
          (like in Quenya or Mandarin). Japanese here, quite befittingly, uses
          the "Consonant + i" kana from the series in question, followed by a
          half-sized "ya", "yu", or "yo" kana, e.g. "mya" = "mi" + "small "ya".

          For doubled consonants (soku-on, represented in Romanization by
          doubling the letter), the under-bar. (Interestingly, Japanese kana
          script here inserts a half-sized "tsu" kana before the sound in
          question.) ]


          > Anyway, I think the following two problems are even more important:
          >
          > What to do with loanword syllables such as "ti" or "tsi"? If we use
          > tinco for all of "ta chi tsu te to", then these are problematic.
          >If we use tinco only for "ta ti tu te to", then the natural sound
          >system of Japanese is broken.

          [ Well, I was actually focussing on the "traditional" sound system
          first. ;) But you're already thinking ahead, and I agree
          that "imported" sounds are potentially quite troublesome.

          I'm not so sure about "shi/si", "chi/ti", "tsu/tu": as you say, if
          we write, say, "ta chi tsu te to", as "tinco plus A, I, U, E, O"
          respectively (regardless of the fact that "ti, tu" are really "chi,
          tsu"--did I understand correctly that that's what you were thinking
          about?), then some loanwords (and there many of them in Japanase)
          might be problematic.
          I'm not even certain whether this would be a good solution, though.
          In a phonemic mode, at least, shouldn't one represent the actual
          sounds of "chi, tsu", as is even reflected in Romanized versions of
          Japanese. Same for "shi".

          Then there are also sounds like "ji/zi, ja/zya, ju/zyu, jo/zyo", in
          kana spelt as "shi/si kana and daku-ten" (for ji/zi), and "shi/si
          kana and daku-ten + half-sized ya/yu/yo", respectively. All very
          neat in kana, but how would one represent this in tengwar? If, for
          arguments sake, we use the consonant chart I outlined above, would
          we spell these sounds with aaze? Hm, sounds feasible...?

          Analogically for "sha, shu, sho, cha, chu, cho" spelled as "sya,
          syu, syo, tya, tyu, tyo"...? ]


          > How to represent the Japanese pitch accent (if at all)?

          [ This I don't consider to be a problem. First of all, Japanese
          pitch, while essential to speaking "natural-sounding", fluent
          Japanese, is by no means as important as, say, the tones in Chinese.
          I mean, Japanese also has a fair amount of homophones, to be sure,
          and pitch can often help to discern them. Still I have found that
          even when one messes up the "word melody" quite a bit, one is
          usually understood (provided one gets the grammar and vocabulary
          right, that is!)--whereas Chinese mostly tends to become quite
          unintelligible, or at least very hard to understand, if you
          consistently get the tones wrong (and Cantonese or "Fukienese" are
          even "worse" in this respect than Mandarin). I also find that in
          Japanese the "melody" of the entire sentence is often more important
          than the pitch of individual words, though to some degree they are
          of course connected.

          Another thing is that existing transcription systems for Japanese,
          such as the the hebonshiki roomaji or the kunreishiki roomaji, don't
          bother to reflect pitch, either--which is probably also testimony to
          the fact that pitch is not quite as crucial as the tones are in
          Chinese (all transcription systems of Chinese, or its dialects, have
          some way of indicating the tones). ]

          Hisilome
        • Arden R. Smith
          ... I thought of an even better example after I had turned off the computer and gone to bed last night, at the beginning of the series of numbers for counting
          Message 4 of 9 , Mar 19, 2006
          • 0 Attachment
            On Mar 19, 2006, at 2:15 AM, hisilome wrote:

            >> Whatever it is, it's a very real relation in Japanese. Just look at
            >> _Nihon_ and _Nippon_ as variant pronunciations of the name of
            >> Japan.
            >> Additionally, initial _h_ often becomes _b_ in compound words, e.g.
            >> _hashi_ 'bridge' in the place-name Nihonbashi 'Japan bridge', and
            >> _hayashi_ 'forest, grove' in the family-name Kobayashi 'small
            > forest'.
            >
            > [ Yeah, that sound change's ubiquitous in Japanese, see
            > also "combinations" like "ten minutes" jippun, (minute = fun) etc.
            > (don't think this is strictly speaking a compound). ]

            I thought of an even better example after I had turned off the computer
            and gone to bed last night, at the beginning of the series of numbers
            for counting long, thin objects: _ippon_, _nihon_, _sanbon_ (or
            _sambon_, depending on your preferred Romanization). There you get all
            three right in a row -- bam! bam! bam!

            I'm afraid that I won't have the time to participate as fully as I
            would like in the present discussion. Right now I'm trying to finish
            up a bunch of things in preparation for a trip (coincidentally enough)
            to Japan. But I do personally favor the option of using the same
            tengwa to represent the same kana series, in a fashion similar to
            kunreishiki rômaji (e.g., ta, ti, tu, te, to), even though it doesn't
            capture the phonetic realizations reflected in Hepburn rômaji (ta, chi,
            tsu, te, to). I just really like the systematicity of it.

            Benct's suggestions re f/h are interesting; I'll have to give them some
            thought.

            As for /s/ and /z/, I would go with thúle and anto; there's no need to
            resort to the additional letters if there are perfectly good primary
            letters lying fallow. I would use óre for /r/ for the same reason.

            While númen would be good for /nV/ combinations, I'm not too keen on
            the idea of also using it for the moraic /n/ (or whatever you want to
            call it). For that, the preceding-nasal tehta would work just fine
            preconsonantally, but I'm still undecided about how to deal with it in
            final position, maybe by means of a tehta. My thinking here is
            undoubtedly colored by the treatment of final /n/ in Qenya alphabets
            from the 1920s; see e.g. _Parma Eldalamberon_ 14, p. 110. Another
            possibility would be to use óre for final /n/, which would in turn
            necessitate the use of rómen for /r/. Or maybe númen for final /n/
            wouldn't be a bad thing after all, especially if it had a _putta_
            (_unutikse_). See what I mean by "undecided"?

            ***************************************************
            Arden R. Smith erilaz@...

            Perilme metto aimaktur perperienta.
            --Elvish proverb

            ***************************************************
          • hisilome
            ... [ That certainly makes sense: hu , at least, is often represented as fu in Romanization (and sounds a lot like it, too--it s actually quite hard to
            Message 5 of 9 , Mar 19, 2006
            • 0 Attachment
              --- In elfscript@yahoogroups.com, Melroch 'Aestan <melroch@...> wrote:


              > Historically _h_ is derived from *f (actually *[p\])
              > which in turn is derived from *p rather than the other
              > way around, so the most straightforward way would be to
              > use Formen for _f_ -- with w-tehta as a diacritic when
              > _f_ occurs before vowels other than _u_ and under-dot when _h_
              > occurs before _u_. C.f. _huzi/fuji_ which is said to be
              > cognate to Korean _phulson_!

              [ That certainly makes sense: "hu", at least, is often represented
              as "fu" in Romanization (and sounds a lot like it, too--it's actually
              quite hard to pronounce "hu" without turning it into "fu", since for
              the "u" you have to purse the lips so much, and then "h" almost
              automatically assumes an "f"-like quality).
              And the "connection" between "h" and "f" also becomes obvious in
              other environments, for example when native speakers of Minnanyu
              don't discern them clearly when speaking Mandarin, pronouncing
              e.g. "hen" as "fen", etc. ]


              J. 'Mach' Wust wrote:
              > > Anyway, I think the following two problems are even more
              >important:
              > > What to do with loanword syllables such as "ti" or "tsi"? If we
              >use tinco for all of "ta chi tsu te to", then these are problematic.
              >If we use tinco only for "ta ti tu te to", then the natural sound
              >system of Japanese is broken.

              Melroch replied:
              > I suggest using the underdot as a general diacritic for
              > "foreign" pronunciation, thus having an underdot on _ti_
              > to distinguish it from _chi_. The Calmatéma should of
              > course not be used at all...

              [ That's an interesting suggestion, and quite feasible if we don't
              assign the under-dot to any other function. The under-dot would then
              be used in lieu of an entire separate kana alphabet (the
              katakana) which the Japanese employ to make foreign words "stick out"
              in writing... ]

              Hisilome
            • hisilome
              ... [ Fair enough! ] ... on the idea of also using it for the moraic /n/ (or whatever you want to call it). For that, the preceding-nasal tehta would work
              Message 6 of 9 , Mar 19, 2006
              • 0 Attachment
                --- In elfscript@yahoogroups.com, Arden R. Smith <erilaz@...> wrote:


                > As for /s/ and /z/, I would go with thúle and anto; there's no need
                >to resort to the additional letters if there are perfectly good
                >primary letters lying fallow. I would use óre for /r/ for the same
                >reason.

                [ Fair enough! ]


                > While númen would be good for /nV/ combinations, I'm not too keen
                on the idea of also using it for the moraic /n/ (or whatever you
                want to call it). For that, the preceding-nasal tehta would work
                just fine preconsonantally, but I'm still undecided about how to deal
                with it in final position, maybe by means of a tehta. My thinking
                here is undoubtedly colored by the treatment of final /n/ in Qenya
                alphabets from the 1920s; see e.g. _Parma Eldalamberon_ 14, p. 110.
                Another possibility would be to use óre for final /n/, which would in
                turn necessitate the use of rómen for /r/.
                Or maybe númen for final /n/ wouldn't be a bad thing after all,
                especially if it had a _putta_ (_unutikse_).

                [ Maybe I'd go for that: using the over-bar/tilde for
                preconsonantal /n/, and nuumen, even without a _putta_, for
                final /n/. After all, it is basically the same sound as initial /n/,
                just in a different position/function.

                Then again, Japanese has an independent kana for moraic /n/--I seem
                to recall that it was a relatively late addition to the syllable
                alphabets (I think the syllable-final sound only developed after the
                original kana charts were drawn up). This might speak for the
                solution with oore, maybe both preconsonantally and word-final? ]

                Hisilome
              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.