Levi Tooker wrote:
> While that is a valid point, I think the author was
> referring to double -consonants-, like in the example
> "chotto", which is written chi(yo)(tsu)to in the
> hiragana syllabary.
Right, but I was just pointing out that there was an example where there
was an unnecessary one-to-one correspondence. I'm sure if there was
something in the Roman alphabet that resembled little tsu that there'd
be some people who'd use that.
> In Romanji, letters are transliterated according to
> pronunciation rather than phonemics. For example, the
> combination which is phonemically /tu/ but
> phonetically /tsu/ is written 'tsu' as in 'tsunami',
> although alternate romanization schemes (there never
> seems to be just one for any language!) would allow
> 'tunami' for the same word.
Yep. And there're advantages to that system, transparency of
inflection, for example. It's easier to see the correspondance in roots
between, for example, matu/matimasu/matanai than between
My standard romanization of Uatakassi is based on that principle.
Otherwise I'd write Watakasshi. I'm not sure how I'd romanize _ki_
(/Ci/ or /C=/ depending on context). Part of the reason I use that
principle is that the pronunciations have evolved as I developed the
lang, and it makes it easier to avoid impossible words. :-)
"There's no such thing as 'cool'. Everyone's just a big dork or nerd,
you just have to find people who are dorky the same way you are." -
AIM Screen-Name: NikTaylor42