I don't intend to fight any further, but just as a

--- "Mark P. Line" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
 Why should I write
> "Ja ne znaju" (I don't know) when I could write "Ya
> nie
> > znayou", which would be much more understandable
> to
> > French people ?
> Why would you use French transliteration of Russian
> in an English post?

Writing "Ja" for the corresponding Cyrillic letter
just happens NOT to be an English-looking
transliteration (otherwise it should be pronounced
like "dzha" in Djamila, or perhaps "jay" like in
James, but rather a supposed more-or-less
international phonetic convention. So, is "ja":
- like French "ja" in déjà ?
- like Russian "ja" (meaning I), or German "ja" (yes)
- like "dja" in Djamila ? or in James ?
- like Spanish "ja" in jamas ?
- something else ? is it one character or two ?
(when it comes to letter x, it's even more funny)

You might argue, well, if there is an international
phonetic convention for Russian, so why don't you use
it ? Well, very precisely because it uses diacritic
signs, for sounds corresponding to "sh", "tsh",
"shtsh", "ts", etc... so it's even worse than for
French (the same for Esperanto, BTW). If I write "ja
zhivu" (I live), "ja" is written according to
international conventions, and "zhivu" according to
English conventions.

So this is all a terrible mess, and that's why I think
my idea, although a basic one, is not completely

And I also find detestable the idea of writing
something like: "le P(e-grave)re No(e trema)l est
all(e-acute) (a-grave) la p(e-circumflex)che." But if
this doesn't confuse you, it's ok for me too.

Philippe Caquant

"High thoughts must have high language." (Aristophanes, Frogs)

Do you Yahoo!?
Win a $20,000 Career Makeover at Yahoo! HotJobs