See also: Transcription
The transliteration is the operation which consists in substituting for each Graphème of a Written form a graphème or a group of graphèmes of another system, independently of the Prononciation. In other words, it is the writing of a word or a text written with a system, in another written form. The transliteration aims at being without loss, so that it should ideally always be possible, by knowing the rules of transliteration, to reconstitute the original text starting from the transliteration. The two written forms should thus be equipotent: a transliteration cannot be ambiguous and should be bijective. To achieve this goal, the systems of transliteration often define complex conventions to treat the graphèmes writing of origin which do not have obvious correspondence in the writing of arrival.
The transliteration is opposed in that to the transcription, which substitutes for each Phonème of a language a graphème or a group of graphèmes of a Written form. More simply, it is the writing in a given system of marked words or sentences. The transcription also aims at being without loss, so that it should ideally always be possible, by knowing the rules of transcription, to reconstitute the original pronunciation starting from the transcription. For the languages whose Orthographe is phonetic or quasi phonetics (for example the Spanish or the Vietnamese ), one can thus consider that the usual writing is a transcription.
The border between transliteration and transcription is erased however when a system of transliteration uses as starting point a purely phonetic written form. For example, the Hanyu pinyin can be simultaneously regarded a system of transcription of the Chinese language and as a system of transliteration of the Bopomofo . In practice, there exist also systems which combine transcription and transliteration, i.e. they transliterate part of the writing of origin and that they transcribe the remainder according to the pronunciation.
The romanisation is either a system of transliteration of a nonLatin writing (like the Cyrillique or the Arab ) towards a Latin writing, or the transcription in a Latin writing of a language using a nonLatin writing. Certain systems of romanisation have a statute of national or international official standard (standards ISO).
Uses
Uses common to the transcription and the transliteration
The transcriptions and the transliterations can be used in a text to note the terms resulting from foreign languages not using the same written form. Thus, the languages using a Latin writing use methods of romanisation to note the words Russian S, Chinese, Japanese…
Uses of the transcription
In the training of a foreign language, even when the taught language uses the same written form as the language of instruction, the transcription is useful to fix the correct pronunciation in writing. For example, for a French-speaking learning the German , one could write chteuflor to explain roughly to him the pronunciation of the word Stöffler .For the languages using of the logographic written forms (what implies a very high number of graphèmes, as in Chinese), the use of a transcription is very useful in the training of the writing by the children (that this transcription is a romanisation, like the Hanyu pinyin used in China, or not, like the Bopomofo used with Taiwan).
Uses of the transliteration
The stability of the C-Ws communication obtained (via the standards of standardization, for example ISO and GOST quoted on this page) as well as the possibility of rétroconversion (to find the original alphabet) intend the transliteration for the uses requiring a rigorous treatment of the writing.It is thus privileged by the libraries or for the data processing of the textual data. The requirements of data-processing seizure and internationalization explain partly why the transliteration is generally a romanisation. For example, the system Paladij of notation of Chinese into Cyrillic (while admitting to regard it as an alternative transliteration of the Bopomofo) is still in force in Russia, but its use remains in withdrawal of the pinyin. Conversely, there does not exist system of transliteration codified of French in Arabic, Russian or géorgien.
It is also of use in linguistic and philological research aiming at an audience larger than the specialists in the language concerned: typology, descriptions intended for the reviews general practitioners, etymological research etc
Various types of transcriptions
The transcription often depends on the uses of the language of the transcriber. For the same language, a French-speaking person will be able to transcribe the sound (in cat ) by the digraph CH , while an english-speaking will choose HS , a German sch and a Pole sz .A transcription Phonétique can be made by means of the International Phonetic Alphabet. It aims at representing the sounds such as they are emitted. One notes such a transcription between right hooks. For example, the French word priest is transcribed. Another transcription is that known as phonological , which does not represent the emitted sounds but the Phonème S of a given language. It is of easier comprehension for the readers of the language given but less precise and one is useful oneself for it of symbols varied more or less close to the International Phonetic Alphabet, variable according to the authors, the noted language, the times (to consult this list). She is written between oblique bars. The same word priest transcribes // phonologiquement.
Examples
Cyrillic
The international standard of transliteration of the Russian carries the number ISO 9. In its last version (1995), this system makes correspond to each Cyrillic character a single character Latin, which makes the transliterations perfectly reversible without least ambiguity.One can give a simple example of the difference between transliteration and transcription: that is to say the Горбачёв patronym; this one will have to be transliterated Gorbačëv according to the standard ISO 9 (equivalence a single character ≡ a single character : to all č must correspond a ч and conversely), but will be transcribed Gorbatchof , Gorbachof or Gorbatschow , according to the language of the transcriber (approximate phonetic equivalence by taking account of the uses of the target language, here respectively French , English and German).
Indeed, the associated standard ISO 9-95 and standards (in particular GOST 7.79 - 2001 Russian) aim at substituting for each Graphème of a Cyrillic Written form a graphème or a Roman group of graphèmes. This standard is applied whenever it is necessary the most accurately to retranscribe possible word or the Cyrillic text in Latin characters, independently of the Prononciation, in order to then provide to reconstitute them without loss during the data processing or in the libraries. The standard does not aim at being used to retranscribe the word or the Cyrillic text in a phonetic way nor to transliterate the geographical localities. It envisages in particular the respect of the standards traditional and esthetic based on the phonetic transcription and does not impose itself in the fields of application other than the algorithmic treatment of text (GOST 7.79 - 2001. Paragraph 4).
Greek
See also: Romanisation of the Greek
The transcription of the old Greek does not raise major problems: indeed, the Greek alphabet of the time is relatively not very ambiguous (with a Graphème generally corresponds only one phonetic interpretation) and a transcription will be very close to a transliteration. For example, γνῶθι σεαυτόν could be transcribed gnothi seauton and transliterated gnỗthi seautón (or gnȭthi seautón ). The transliteration will just utilize the accents (and the vocalic quantities). It is possible to find the original easily, even starting from a fuzzy transcription.
The modern Greek , however, is much more difficult to treat. Indeed, its pronunciation is modified by giving rise to many written phonemes in ways different like to phonetic values from certain letters very distant from our practices. One of the “awkward” modifications more is the Iotacisme, which made decide six graphèmes different which, in old Greek, were not confused. In the same way, ε and αι decide; ο and ω are worth both. Thus, the transliteration and the transcription will be sometimes very distant (what is an indication of complex orthography: indeed, it is not possible to directly note, with listening, a modern Greek word without knowing the C-W communication of it).
Here a concrete example. That is to say worms following of Odysséas Elýtis:
- Στην αρχαία εκείνη θάλασσα που εγνώριζα ( invisible Newspaper of April one , “Saturday the 11th”).
The problem thus arises for the current proper names: is it necessary to choose the transcription or the transliteration? For example, Γιάννης Αλευράς transliterates Giánnês Aleurás but transcribes Yánnis Alevrás , even Yannis Alévras if one uses the Acute accent while following French conventions. “Worse”, transliterated Βασίλης Κοντογιαννόπουλος will be closer to the French practices because its first name, Βασίλης, will be worth Basílês , which makes it possible to recognize Basile , whereas the transcription, Vasílis , even Vassilis , mask the bond with Basile . As for the patronym, it can be surprising to note that it transliterates Kontogiannópoulos and Kondoyannópoulos is transcribed (or Kondoyannopoulos ).
Hebrew
The alphabetical order of the Hebrew alphabet, known as order Levantine, is very old and very near to that of the Latin alphabet. YHWH is a frequent transliteration of the Nom of God in the Hebraic Bible, but one finds also IHVH or JHVH. These two remarks result in proposing the following transliteration of the 22 letters of the alphabet Hebrew (see Guématrie):
- the first 9 letters: ABGD HWCEt
- 9 following: Y' KLMN' XŒFZ
- 4 last: QRST
False transliterations or translations?
In the written Media, it is current to practice a kind of transliteration loose which consists in coarsely representing a foreign word in the fuzzy respect of its Graphie of origin. When the starting alphabet is already Latin, this false transliteration is generally done by giving up the diacritic S and other signs not existing in the target language. The result is however read as a transcription but this one does not have sometimes anything any more to see with the starting pronunciation.For example, the Горбачёв patronym is returned by Gorbatchev . The Russian ё , writes normally without Tréma (which is used especially in the teaching works; the Горбачёв patronym is thus usually written into Cyrillic Горбачев ), decides here and not and the final в . To return, in Latin alphabet, by Gorbatchev , brings to pronounce it in a way very different from the original pronunciation, with one and one.
This process henceforth was essential like a true process of translation of all the Russian proper names comprising - е- or - ё- in the original, indépendammant of the effective pronunciation: Gorbatchev joined Khrouchtchev , but also Brejnev (of which the finale decides in Russian), the name of Орёл city is translated officially Orel
The case is very frequent with modified Latin alphabets, like that of the Polish. The wide characters absent from the current keyboards are simply omitted, without one adapting the Orthographe however so that it represents the real pronunciation best. Thus, the name of the pope Jean-Paul II, Wojtyła (with a L barred, pronounced) is simply written Wojtyla , with a L normal. The French speaker should thus pronounce this false transliteration v but the most frequent pronunciation is a compromise finally rather near to the Polish pronunciation to which only the actual value of the ł misses (abstraction made of the place of the tonic stress, on the penultimate syllable in Polish, and the value of, nearer to than of French). Of the same Lech Walesa , written Lech Wałęsa in Polish, decides in this language va' wɛ̃ŋsa that a French empirical transcription could return “Lekh Vawensa roughly”. Conversely, the Polish use requires the transcription of the traditional foreign names: Shakespeare is thus written in Polish Szekspir , but one keeps the French C-W communication for Chirac .
Transliteration in interpretation
In the medium of the interpretation near the deaf or deaf people, the transliteration is the operation which consists in reproducing the sound message in visible message on the lips for the benefit of the deaf people who practice the labial reading. The expression “interpretation oral” is also used to indicate the transliteration.
| Random links: | Beaudricourt | PhpGroupWare | The Truth if I lie! 2 | The Queen of the elves of Shannara | Jem and holograms |