From keld  Tue Nov 25 14:47:19 1997
Received: (from keld@localhost) by dkuug.dk (8.6.12/8.6.12) id OAA05455; Tue, 25 Nov 1997 14:47:19 +0100
Message-Id: <199711251347.OAA05455@dkuug.dk>
From: keld@dkuug.dk (Keld J|rn Simonsen)
Date: Tue, 25 Nov 1997 14:47:18 +0100
In-Reply-To: Jonathan Rosenne <rosenne@NetVision.net.il>
       "Re: Transliteration [and transcription]" (Nov 25,  5:51)
X-Charset: ISO-8859-1
X-Char-Esc: 29
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; Charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Mnemonic-Intro: 29
X-Mailer: Mail User's Shell (7.2.2 4/12/91)
To: Jonathan Rosenne <rosenne@NetVision.net.il>
Subject: Re: Transliteration [and transcription]
Cc: i18n@dkuug.dk

Jonathan Rosenne writes:

> >The rules I am talking about are based strictly on converting on
> >a character-by-character base, and thus this is transliteration.
> >It is of cause meant to be pronouncable in the target language
> >environment, but it is fully mechanical.
> >
> >I understand that you think there is a need for standards for
> >this, despite our disagreement on terminology.
> 
> The rules can be mechanical for Russian, which is fairly phonetic, but are
> they really? To you spell the suffix as "ovo" or "ogo"?

There are no morphology or syntax analyses in what I am talking
about.

> But for Arabic or Hebrew you would most likely add vowels and represent
> pronounciation, e.g. Tel Aviv rather than Tl Abib. Or not?

That seems more useful, but I do not want to be involved in transcriptio,
where human intervenience, text analysis  or bigger databases are
needed to be applied.

Keld