Print

Print


On Sun, May 13, 2001 at 01:35:44AM -0400, John Cowan wrote:
> Raymond Brown scripsit:
> > >Note that my transliterations are by ear, since there is no
> > >transliteration method extant for Ecclesiastic Greek,
> >
> > No worries - I know exactly what the words are and mentally transliterated
> > as I read   :)
>
> Strictly speaking, this is transcription, not transliteration.  Transcription
> is from one language to another, and uses the conventions of the target
> language to represent the sounds of the source language, e.g.
> saying that Latin "natus" is pronounced "NAH-toos".

Ugh, I HATE that kind of thing! A glossophile friend of mine and I have
talked a few times about how it's actually harder for us to read that kind
of transcription in most cases.

Of course, "transcription" can also be given in IPA (or any IPA-like
alphabet).

> Transliteration is from one *script* to another, and represents the tokens
> of the source writing system using corresponding tokens of the target
> writing system.  Wring "yennaos" would be transliteration only if
> "y" was always used to transliterate "gamma", including such words
> as "ayyelos". :-)

Where did you get that definition? I've never heard it, but looked in the
AHD4 to make sure. It says:

 (transliterate)

 TRANSITIVE VERB :
 Inflected forms: -at*ed, -at*ing, -ates
  To represent (letters or words) in the corresponding characters of another
 alphabet.

It says "corresponding," but nothing about a *perfect* correspondence.

--
Eric Christopherson / *Aiworegs Ghristobhorosyo