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

A protocol for names?

Expand Messages
  • Stephen Rice
    We have a borrowing algorithm, but what about names? In reading the translation of _The Invisible Man_, I noticed that Hall became Hol. Fair enough; that s
    Message 1 of 12 , Apr 3, 2012
    • 0 Attachment
      We have a borrowing algorithm, but what about names?

      In reading the translation of _The Invisible Man_, I noticed that
      "Hall" became "Hol." Fair enough; that's what I would do in Inlis,
      though I somehow would have expected "Hal." But how do we import
      names?

      For example, do we have Sheikspir? What about Gaelic names that sound
      little like their spelling--as a trivial example, Shon Konari?

      What about "John"--oh, sorry, not the English name; I mean as in the
      Baptist or the Apostle? Hebrew Yohan, Greek Yoanes, Latin
      Yohanes--what is it in LdP? Or if you really want some fun, what about
      "Jesus"? There's some agreement on the form--it usually begins with
      <j> or <i> or <y> followed by an /e/ or sometimes /i/ followed by <su>
      or <shu> and sometimes a final <s>. But what is all that in LdP?

      Can we even imagine guidelines for this?

      Steve
    • Dmitry Ivanov
      Okay, let s try to determine the guidelines for proper names. If we succeed in doing so, I d ask you, Steve, to make a summary in your faultless English, so
      Message 2 of 12 , Apr 4, 2012
      • 0 Attachment

        Okay, let's try to determine the guidelines for proper names. If we succeed in doing so, I'd ask you, Steve, to make a summary in your faultless English, so that we can put it to the grammar.

        My guidelines would be:
        1) follow the way people pronounce it, rather than the way they write it
        2) follow the current situation/reality rather than historical one
        3) In certain cases, when a name is a compound with evident meaning of parts, one can follow etymology. For example: "Unisi-ney Statas de Amerika" rather than "Yunaitid Steits ov Emerike".

        Mrs Hall becomes Hol according to the guideline 1. For me it's a rather evident solution, because I am used to phonetical rendering of names in Russian. As distinct from languages using Latin script where words can be imported as they are written (thus, French and Spanish have "show" for "show"), Russian has to write it in its own way. So it has Холл for Hall. Where it tries to copy the English writing is double consonants: Холл, Уэллс, Милли. I am not sure about copying double consonants. So far I always preferred to dismiss one of consonants, so you can see Hol, Mili, Wels. But now I am thinking, maybe it's OK to keep double consonants in proper names: why not Holl, Milli, Wells. Recently I even suggested reggei for reggae. Maybe it is not bad to keep double consonants in some international words, to facilitate their recognition. Please give feedback.

        In case of names that have one etymological origin but different current form in different languages (Peter, Piotr, Pedro), we shouldn't seek for the first historical form of the name but simply follow the current situation, i.e. let them be Piter, Piotr, Pedro... That's the guideline 2.

        In Buvidibil Jen you'll find that I have used also the third guideline: the railway station Bramblehurst becomes ferdao stasion Swatberilok. (Bramble is a kind of berry, and hurst is a kind of hill). Why did I do it? Because it is common that some quiet countryside villages or towns have names mentioning nature. It's usual in Russian too. Now Bremblherst would be just senseless conglomeration of consonants. Sure, if the place were widely known, one shouldn't have done it. But here we don't know even if such a location really exists. (Btw I was extremely surprised to know that DOWN means a kind of upland, but that's just in brackets).

        The guideline 3 can be easily used in fairy tales. I can imagine lideplisation of Tolkien names: Bilbo Baggins can become Bilbo Baonik or something similar.

        With Shakespear, following (1) and (2), it should be rendered Sheikspir, if even it was pronounced differently at his times (which I don't know).

        With apostle John and Jesus, yes, this is the bare bodkin (a joke by Mark Twain). We should have one name for them unlike the situation with Pedros and Peters. What can be done is to follow a procedure similar to the borrowing algorithm: compare the forms in major languages and try to find the most used one. It may be done sound by sound: if at the beginning most languages have <i>, not <j>, then let the first sound be <i>. Etc. One can try.

        Dimitri
      • Michael Everson
        I d really like to see the unnecessary hyphen removed from productive suffixes like ney . ... Hypehenating a compound makes some sense. But Unisi-ney is not
        Message 3 of 12 , Apr 4, 2012
        • 0 Attachment
          I'd really like to see the unnecessary hyphen removed from productive suffixes like "ney".

          On 4 Apr 2012, at 09:56, Dmitry Ivanov wrote:

          > 3) In certain cases, when a name is a compound with evident meaning of parts, one can follow etymology. For example: "Unisi-ney Statas de Amerika" rather than "Yunaitid Steits ov Emerike".

          Hypehenating a compound makes some sense. But "Unisi-ney" is not a compound.

          Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/
        • Stephen Rice
          ... I m just surprised at the precise vowel chosen; I would ve expected an . (I would use in Inlis, but that s a matter of its peculiar vowel mappings.)
          Message 4 of 12 , Apr 4, 2012
          • 0 Attachment
            On 4/4/12, Dmitry Ivanov <lingwadeplaneta@...> wrote:
            >
            > Okay, let's try to determine the guidelines for proper names. If we succeed
            > in doing so, I'd ask you, Steve, to make a summary in your faultless
            > English, so that we can put it to the grammar.
            >
            > My guidelines would be:
            > 1) follow the way people pronounce it, rather than the way they write it
            > 2) follow the current situation/reality rather than historical one
            > 3) In certain cases, when a name is a compound with evident meaning of
            > parts, one can follow etymology. For example: "Unisi-ney Statas de Amerika"
            > rather than "Yunaitid Steits ov Emerike".
            >
            > Mrs Hall becomes Hol according to the guideline 1. For me it's a rather
            > evident solution, because I am used to phonetical rendering of names in
            > Russian. As distinct from languages using Latin script where words can be
            > imported as they are written (thus, French and Spanish have "show" for
            > "show"), Russian has to write it in its own way. So it has Холл for Hall.

            I'm just surprised at the precise vowel chosen; I would've expected an
            <a>. (I would use <o> in Inlis, but that's a matter of its peculiar
            vowel mappings.) Some regional variations may complicate matters: in
            England, "Peters" is roughly /pitas/ (in LdP phonemes), while in the
            US it would generally be /pitrs/ (with a syllabic r).

            > Where it tries to copy the English writing is double consonants: Холл,
            > Уэллс, Милли. I am not sure about copying double consonants. So far I always
            > preferred to dismiss one of consonants, so you can see Hol, Mili, Wels. But
            > now I am thinking, maybe it's OK to keep double consonants in proper names:
            > why not Holl, Milli, Wells. Recently I even suggested reggei for reggae.
            > Maybe it is not bad to keep double consonants in some international words,
            > to facilitate their recognition. Please give feedback.

            I don't like double consonants either, though it would be less
            problematic in names and might improve visibility in searches.

            > In case of names that have one etymological origin but different current
            > form in different languages (Peter, Piotr, Pedro), we shouldn't seek for the
            > first historical form of the name but simply follow the current situation,
            > i.e. let them be Piter, Piotr, Pedro... That's the guideline 2.

            Of course no native anglophone says "Piter"... US generally has
            "Pitr"; UK has "Pita."

            > In Buvidibil Jen you'll find that I have used also the third guideline: the
            > railway station Bramblehurst becomes ferdao stasion Swatberilok. (Bramble is
            > a kind of berry, and hurst is a kind of hill). Why did I do it? Because it
            > is common that some quiet countryside villages or towns have names
            > mentioning nature. It's usual in Russian too. Now Bremblherst would be just
            > senseless conglomeration of consonants. Sure, if the place were widely
            > known, one shouldn't have done it. But here we don't know even if such a
            > location really exists. (Btw I was extremely surprised to know that DOWN
            > means a kind of upland, but that's just in brackets).

            "Bramble" also implies thorns: it's a bush that will scratch you and
            tear your clothes. "Hurst" is a grove or perhaps a wooded hill, but
            it's very uncommon in modern usage.

            > The guideline 3 can be easily used in fairy tales. I can imagine
            > lideplisation of Tolkien names: Bilbo Baggins can become Bilbo Baonik or
            > something similar.

            I can see your reasoning, but I still think you would wind up on the
            wrong end of a literary jihad, at least from Tolkien fans.

            > With Shakespear, following (1) and (2), it should be rendered Sheikspir, if
            > even it was pronounced differently at his times (which I don't know).
            >
            > With apostle John and Jesus, yes, this is the bare bodkin (a joke by Mark
            > Twain). We should have one name for them unlike the situation with Pedros
            > and Peters. What can be done is to follow a procedure similar to the
            > borrowing algorithm: compare the forms in major languages and try to find
            > the most used one. It may be done sound by sound: if at the beginning most
            > languages have <i>, not <j>, then let the first sound be <i>. Etc. One can
            > try.

            I think I'd use "Yohanes" for John and "Yesu" for Jesus; I'll try to
            put something together for the wiki. If I had to translate the
            genealogies of Matthew and Luke, I think I'd just transliterate the
            Greek.

            Steve
          • Michael Everson
            ... Tolkien gave rules for what names could and should be translated and what should not be. Baggins is often translated. Michael Everson *
            Message 5 of 12 , Apr 4, 2012
            • 0 Attachment
              On 4 Apr 2012, at 21:26, Stephen Rice wrote:

              >> The guideline 3 can be easily used in fairy tales. I can imagine
              >> lideplisation of Tolkien names: Bilbo Baggins can become Bilbo Baonik or
              >> something similar.
              >
              > I can see your reasoning, but I still think you would wind up on the
              > wrong end of a literary jihad, at least from Tolkien fans.

              Tolkien gave rules for what names could and should be translated and what should not be. Baggins is often translated.

              Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/
            • Carlos Solís
              ... In the particular case of names, I suggest using the native transliteration; Hebrew names for Hebrew people, and same with Greek, Latin, and Arabic names.
              Message 6 of 12 , Apr 4, 2012
              • 0 Attachment
                El 04/04/2012 14:26, Stephen Rice escribió:
                 


                > With apostle John and Jesus, yes, this is the bare bodkin (a joke by Mark
                > Twain). We should have one name for them unlike the situation with Pedros
                > and Peters. What can be done is to follow a procedure similar to the
                > borrowing algorithm: compare the forms in major languages and try to find
                > the most used one. It may be done sound by sound: if at the beginning most
                > languages have <i>, not <j>, then let the first sound be <i>. Etc. One can
                > try.

                I think I'd use "Yohanes" for John and "Yesu" for Jesus; I'll try to
                put something together for the wiki. If I had to translate the
                genealogies of Matthew and Luke, I think I'd just transliterate the
                Greek.

                In the particular case of names, I suggest using the native transliteration; Hebrew names for Hebrew people, and same with Greek, Latin, and Arabic names.


                - Carlos Solís
              • Stephen Rice
                ... That could lead to a little entertainment. The idea isn t bad, and it would be quicker than polling several languages. And source might be better than
                Message 7 of 12 , Apr 4, 2012
                • 0 Attachment
                  On 4/4/12, Carlos Solís <csolisr@...> wrote:
                  > El 04/04/2012 14:26, Stephen Rice escribió:

                  >> I think I'd use "Yohanes" for John and "Yesu" for Jesus; I'll try to
                  >> put something together for the wiki. If I had to translate the
                  >> genealogies of Matthew and Luke, I think I'd just transliterate the
                  >> Greek.
                  >>
                  > In the particular case of names, I suggest using the native
                  > transliteration; Hebrew names for Hebrew people, and same with Greek,
                  > Latin, and Arabic names.

                  That could lead to a little entertainment. The idea isn't bad, and it
                  would be quicker than polling several languages. And "source" might be
                  better than "native" here: in some cases, it's hard to know what
                  Hebrew or Aramaic name was behind NT Greek renderings.

                  But that's nothing compared to the fireworks you'll set off in certain
                  cases. "John" is easy: it derives from "Yohanan" ("God is gracious"),
                  and may be spelled thus. But "Jesus" should properly be "Yeshu"--and
                  that would annoy a few people. It's often written as "Yeshua," but
                  technically the final vowel is epenthethic: it's there to smooth out
                  the guttural. So it's not really there, which is why Greek (both NT
                  and Septuagint) has Iesous (Yesuus) instead of *Iesouas.

                  And then there's Mary. Because the NT, like the Septuagint, was
                  written well before a vowel shift that changed short a in an
                  unstressed, closed syllable to a short i, it gives the name of Jesus'
                  mother as "Maryam"--the same as Moses' sister. By the time the
                  Masoretes got to work, the vowel shift had hit, so they gave us
                  "Miriam," which some people still think is the name of Jesus' mother.

                  Still, I suppose such cases would be relatively few, and it would be
                  quick and easy.

                  Steve
                • cafaristeir
                  It s a pity I never read those rules. However, I had translated a few chapters from Tokien s in an earlier version of Sambahsa, and Bilbo is mentionned as
                  Message 8 of 12 , Apr 4, 2012
                  • 0 Attachment
                    It's a pity I never read those rules.
                    However, I had translated a few chapters from Tokien's in an earlier version of Sambahsa, and Bilbo is mentionned as "Bilbo Sackins" at the end of "Khiters & Klehpters", whose action takes place between Bree and Rivendell a few years before the Ring Wars :
                    http://sambahsa.pbworks.com/w/page/24687743/Vocabulary%20key%20to%20%22Khiters%20ed%20klehpters%22
                    Let's remember "Bag's End"...(Fr : "Cul-de-Sac")

                    Olivier


                    --- In lingwadeplaneta@yahoogroups.com, Michael Everson <everson@...> wrote:
                    >
                    > On 4 Apr 2012, at 21:26, Stephen Rice wrote:
                    >
                    > >> The guideline 3 can be easily used in fairy tales. I can imagine
                    > >> lideplisation of Tolkien names: Bilbo Baggins can become Bilbo Baonik or
                    > >> something similar.
                    > >
                    > > I can see your reasoning, but I still think you would wind up on the
                    > > wrong end of a literary jihad, at least from Tolkien fans.
                    >
                    > Tolkien gave rules for what names could and should be translated and what should not be. Baggins is often translated.
                    >
                    > Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/
                    >
                  • Dmitry Ivanov
                    ... Okay, let s have source rendering for such cases. (Theoretically, an exception might be only if the major languages agree with each other but disagree
                    Message 9 of 12 , Apr 5, 2012
                    • 0 Attachment
                      >> In the particular case of names, I suggest using the native
                      >> transliteration; Hebrew names for Hebrew people, and same with Greek,
                      >> Latin, and Arabic names.

                      >That could lead to a little entertainment. The idea isn't bad, and it
                      >would be quicker than polling several languages. And "source" might be
                      >better than "native" here: in some cases, it's hard to know what
                      >Hebrew or Aramaic name was behind NT Greek renderings.

                      Okay, let's have "source" rendering for such cases. (Theoretically, an exception might be only if the major languages agree with each other but disagree with the sourse; but I can't think of examples). Steve, because you seem to have a considerable knowledge of the subject, maybe you compile for us a short list of names of most prominent figures of the Bible stories, for future use.
                      Well, looks like the problem is mostly solved.

                      > I'm just surprised at the precise vowel chosen; I would've expected an
                      <a>

                      Why? Isn't it /hɔːl/ (/hO:l/) ?

                      Dmitry


                    • Michael Everson
                      ... This can lead to incomprehensibility. Who will recognize Hawwa as Eve? ... When we were sorting out the names for the Cornish Bible, the translator and I
                      Message 10 of 12 , Apr 5, 2012
                      • 0 Attachment
                        On 5 Apr 2012, at 08:11, Dmitry Ivanov wrote:

                        > >> In the particular case of names, I suggest using the native
                        > >> transliteration; Hebrew names for Hebrew people, and same with Greek,
                        > >> Latin, and Arabic names.

                        This can lead to incomprehensibility. Who will recognize Hawwa as Eve?

                        > >That could lead to a little entertainment. The idea isn't bad, and it
                        > >would be quicker than polling several languages. And "source" might be
                        > >better than "native" here: in some cases, it's hard to know what
                        > >Hebrew or Aramaic name was behind NT Greek renderings.

                        When we were sorting out the names for the Cornish Bible, the translator and I of course had some names which had been borrowed into Cornish already, so it was easy to see that Middle English and Latin were sources. By "source" we meant 'the place that Cornish speakers would have learnt these names'. They had of course no access to Aramaic or Arabic. In fact they hardly had access to Greek ones (ca. 1550-1610).

                        > Okay, let's have "source" rendering for such cases. (Theoretically, an exception might be only if the major languages agree with each other but disagree with the sourse; but I can't think of examples). Steve, because you seem to have a considerable knowledge of the subject, maybe you compile for us a short list of names of most prominent figures of the Bible stories, for future use.

                        In Arie de Jong's Volapük translation of the New Testament, he pretty much borrows Latin names straight from the Vulgate, and writes them in angle brackets in the text. In a European context this seems not too strange (apart from the angle brackets).

                        I'm preparing a new edition of de Jong's New Testament, and I'm doing away with the angle brackets, and re-spelling the Latin names to conform to Volapük orthography. I made a list which is at http://volapük.com/nems-diateka.html

                        Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/
                      • cafaristeir
                        In Sambahsa, the general guideline is to look at the words in French, English & German and to see if there is a consensus between two of them. If no, then we
                        Message 11 of 12 , Apr 5, 2012
                        • 0 Attachment
                          In Sambahsa, the general guideline is to look at the words in French, English & German and to see if there is a consensus between two of them. If no, then we take the native form.
                          This is only a guideline; for example, it can be discarded if it sounds too ridiculous in Sambahsa or if an interesting IE or Semitic etymology can be found with Sambahsa.

                          Steve has already translated some portions of the Gospel : http://sambahsa.wikinet.org/wiki/Bible

                          Olivier
                        • Stephen Rice
                          ... Miriam (or rather Maryam ) is one example, and as Michael pointed out, Eve or (to use the LdP transliteration) Hawa is worse. However, a quick check
                          Message 12 of 12 , Apr 6, 2012
                          • 0 Attachment
                            On 4/5/12, Dmitry Ivanov <lingwadeplaneta@...> wrote:
                            >>> In the particular case of names, I suggest using the native
                            >>> transliteration; Hebrew names for Hebrew people, and same with Greek,
                            >>> Latin, and Arabic names.
                            >
                            >>That could lead to a little entertainment. The idea isn't bad, and it
                            >>would be quicker than polling several languages. And "source" might be
                            >>better than "native" here: in some cases, it's hard to know what
                            >>Hebrew or Aramaic name was behind NT Greek renderings.
                            >
                            > Okay, let's have "source" rendering for such cases. (Theoretically, an
                            > exception might be only if the major languages agree with each other but
                            > disagree with the sourse; but I can't think of examples).

                            "Miriam" (or rather "Maryam") is one example, and as Michael pointed
                            out, "Eve" or (to use the LdP transliteration) "Hawa" is worse.
                            However, a quick check shows that Hawa/Hava is somewhat common, so
                            perhaps it's an option.

                            Steve, because you
                            > seem to have a considerable knowledge of the subject, maybe you compile for
                            > us a short list of names of most prominent figures of the Bible stories, for
                            > future use.

                            I can; it'll just take a while. I suppose I could start a section on
                            the Wiki. It might be a good idea to have a general names page.

                            >> I'm just surprised at the precise vowel chosen; I would've expected an
                            > <a>
                            >
                            > Why? Isn't it /hɔːl/(/hO:l/) ?

                            In the UK, yes; in the US, it varies. This is one of the major
                            problems in borrowing from English. In Dana Nutter's angloclone, these
                            various sounds were leveled to <a>; I chose <o> instead because I
                            think it fits the combined quirks of phonology and orthography better.
                            For a non-angloclone, I'd probably choose <a> in this case.

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