Pubblicità

Transliteration differences

36 posts / 0 nuovo
Novice
<a href="/it/translator/vahid" class="userpopupinfo username" rel="user1362202">vahid</a>
Iscritto dal: 21.11.2017
Pending moderation

Can someone please explain the differences between transliteration and romanization with example? Thanks

And please tell if you know how we should search a subject in the forum?

Editor Eastern/Oriental
<a href="/it/translator/diazepan-medina" class="userpopupinfo username" rel="user1321515">Diazepan Medina</a>
Iscritto dal: 02.01.2017

The romanization is only a transliteration to the latin alphabet

But a transliteration could be from the latin alphabet to Cyrillic characters
https://lyricstranslate.com/en/who-%D1%85%D1%83.html

Moderator of most things Romanic
<a href="/it/translator/knee427" class="userpopupinfo username" rel="user1110108">Alma Barroca</a>
Iscritto dal: 05.04.2012

Romanization > specifically into the Latin alphabet.
Transliteration > any other alphabet (Cyrillic, Greek, Devanagari, Hangul, Farsi, etc.).

That's just about it.

As for thread searching, there's no such option at the moment.

Moderator — Í tokuni
<a href="/it/translator/xkumii" class="userpopupinfo username" rel="user1087920">Geheiligt</a>
Iscritto dal: 10.07.2011

Note that Romanization is also know as Latinization. That's it Wink smile

Novice
<a href="/it/translator/vahid" class="userpopupinfo username" rel="user1362202">vahid</a>
Iscritto dal: 21.11.2017

Thanks, and in the transcription or adding song, should we write what exactly we hear or what it seems correct? Because sometimes the singer pronounces very fast and the words in that situation seem meaningless

Moderator of most things Romanic
<a href="/it/translator/knee427" class="userpopupinfo username" rel="user1110108">Alma Barroca</a>
Iscritto dal: 05.04.2012

You can use footnotes to indicate that you're not sure about what the artist really is singing. You can also add marks like '[???]' and '[?]' to the lyrics. You should also mention, via 'submitter's comment' that you wrote what you could hear (specially in cases where a booklet or reliable lyrics could not be found), specifying that you might have missed parts and/or added wrong ones.
As we don't have a 'lyrics proofreading' feature so far, you can either leave it like that or ask in the forums (or via PM) if someone could help you with your doubts. We have several users with a good ear around.

Novice
<a href="/it/translator/vahid" class="userpopupinfo username" rel="user1362202">vahid</a>
Iscritto dal: 21.11.2017

Thanks, I mean we know what the singer is saying but should we write what exactly he/she is saying or what it seems correct? for example in Persian we have some words like "مثل" but some singers doesn't pronounce the letter "ل" in the word "مثل" and he/she pronounces it "مث" but "مث" is a meaningless word, in this situation should we write it "مثل" or "مث" ? (In the cases of transcription or adding song)

Editor (Resident Evil)
<a href="/it/translator/magicmulder" class="userpopupinfo username" rel="user1264038">magicmulder</a>
Iscritto dal: 26.10.2015

My personal opinion: words should be written as sung/spoken (same as when an English singer sings "'bout" instead of "about" or "'cos" instead of "because"). If you feel it's necessary for understanding the lyrics, you can add a footnote which word is actually meant.

Editor (Resident Evil)
<a href="/it/translator/magicmulder" class="userpopupinfo username" rel="user1264038">magicmulder</a>
Iscritto dal: 26.10.2015
Diazepan Medina wrote:

The romanization is only a transliteration to the latin alphabet

Isn't romanization more complex than "transliteration to Latin alphabet"?
If I understood it correctly, transliteration is a 1:1 letter/symbol-wise copy whereas romanization respects pronunciation and thus can transcribe the same source letter with different target letters.

So Ukrainian Володи́мир would be transliterated "Wolodimir" but romanized "Wladimir".

Or as a ficticious example, if the source language noun "§o§a" were pronounced "ksoh-shuh", a transliteration would e.g. render it "xoxa" but a romanization would use "xosha" in English and "Xoscha" in German.

Super Member
<a href="/it/translator/paotrlaouen" class="userpopupinfo username" rel="user1447583">PaotrLaouen</a>
Iscritto dal: 24.02.2020

Translitterate is converting any written expression into another system of writing.
Romanizing is the same, but only into the Latin alphabet.
In fact, the original script should be (semi-)alphabetical, or at least syllabic - no matter of the language.
You can romanise a text in Arabic in Latin (may I say "modern occidental"?) script, NOT in Greek or Hebrew script.
I do'nt know what term should be used for Chinese or Japanese.

Editor Eastern/Oriental
<a href="/it/translator/diazepan-medina" class="userpopupinfo username" rel="user1321515">Diazepan Medina</a>
Iscritto dal: 02.01.2017

For japanese is katakanization. Writing the words in the katakana syllabary

Novice
<a href="/it/translator/vahid" class="userpopupinfo username" rel="user1362202">vahid</a>
Iscritto dal: 21.11.2017

I'm not native at English but I did read and listen some songs today, for example in those lyrics the singers pronounced
but I > bur I
didn't > dient
Shouldn't > shouent
And then I thought I should write in a way to look correct not what I hear , there were some other words that the singer didn't pronounce it correctly, and these songs that I read weren't rap songs because in rap songs it's hard to say that they pronounce each word correctly although that the lyrics that I saw had been written correctly

Editor True-to-original translations.
<a href="/it/translator/michaelna" class="userpopupinfo username" rel="user1257575">MichaelNa</a>
Iscritto dal: 29.08.2015
vahid wrote:

I'm not native at English but I did read and listen some songs today, for example in those lyrics the singers pronounced
but I > bur I
didn't > dient
Shouldn't > shouent
And then I thought I should write in a way to look correct not what I hear , there were some other words that the singer didn't pronounce it correctly, and these songs that I read weren't rap songs because in rap songs it's hard to say that they pronounce each word correctly although that the lyrics that I saw had been written correctly

The examples you provided have nothing to do with transliteration or romanization. At the most they could be considered as colloquialisms like "ain't", "gonna", "gotta", "kinda", "wanna", "wanta", "kinda", "hafta", "tryna" etc. but transcribing “bur I” instead of “but I”, “dient” instead of “didn't“, “shouent” instead of ”shouldn't” would be wrong and confusing.
A transliteration is taking a piece written using an alphabet and making it readable in another (naturally one still wouldn’t know its meaning).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transliteration
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romanization

Novice
<a href="/it/translator/vahid" class="userpopupinfo username" rel="user1362202">vahid</a>
Iscritto dal: 21.11.2017

Yes my question was just about transcription, so we should write what it seems correct not what exactly we hear? like the word "مثل" in Persian, something the letter "ل" isn't pronounced, it's not confusing but it's wrong

Super Member
<a href="/it/translator/paotrlaouen" class="userpopupinfo username" rel="user1447583">PaotrLaouen</a>
Iscritto dal: 24.02.2020

It depends: some colloquialisms are significant, others are not. Only the first ones should be transcribed. But no one would probably be able to set up general rules to determine what is significant or not.
Usually, lyrics are copyrighted with a certain text: it should be stuck to it.

Super Member
<a href="/it/translator/caizer" class="userpopupinfo username" rel="user1427291">Caizer</a>
Iscritto dal: 12.07.2019

IMO, write what seems correct. If what you exactly hear still makes sense for everyone who understands that language then that's the time you can write what you hear. We should go for understandability, first and foremost.

Senior Member
<a href="/it/translator/kitkat1" class="userpopupinfo username" rel="user1276741">KitKat1</a>
Iscritto dal: 07.02.2016

It is very difficult to determine which colloquialisms are significant and whether or not to transcribe them in a language you don’t speak fluently. Native speakers usually just “know” based on experience of what “sounds right” (although what is “right” can be very subjective). Learners don’t get that sense until they are near fluent, and maybe not even then.

Not that you shouldn’t try—but definitely be open to correction and critique from the native speakers!

Super Member
<a href="/it/translator/paotrlaouen" class="userpopupinfo username" rel="user1447583">PaotrLaouen</a>
Iscritto dal: 24.02.2020

Apart from colloquialisms, some problems are inherent to the orthographic rules of each language:
In French, we have a major problem with what is called "silent E",and may be sounded or not without any rule, and depending partly on local accents.
For instance "un petit chemin" (= a little path) may be pronounced as written, or "p'tit chemin", or "petit ch'min", or "p'tit ch'min". Under normal circumstances, only the first form may be written down; but in poetry or when transcribing a song, the others may POSSIBLY be used in order to show how many syllables - and consequently how many notes - are really uttered.
Now, you have to choose between a readable version or a singable one!

Super Member
<a href="/it/translator/michael-didenko" class="userpopupinfo username" rel="user1414518">Michael Didenko</a>
Iscritto dal: 05.03.2019

The Ukrainian “Володи́мир” cannot be transliterated as "Wladimir", because it is pronounced exactly like “Volodymyr” in the Ukrainian language («Володы́мыр» in Russian alphabet). Cyrillic letters representing vowels are pronounced differently in Russian and Ukrainian. Cyrillic-based national alphabets are not the same for different Slavic languages! Also, many Latin letters indicate different sounds in various European languages. Compare, for example, the sounds indicated by the letter “j” in English and in Spanish. Many consonants of Slavic languages can be written only by a combination of Latin letters. In transliteration to Latin, combinations of letters typical of the English language are usually used. So romanization or englishization?
I don’t see much sense in transliteration at all. It is easier to learn the national alphabet than to understand what transliteration rules the author of transliteration was guided by.

Editor (Resident Evil)
<a href="/it/translator/magicmulder" class="userpopupinfo username" rel="user1264038">magicmulder</a>
Iscritto dal: 26.10.2015
Michael Didenko schrieb:

The Ukrainian “Володи́мир” cannot be transliterated as "Wladimir", because it is pronounced exactly like “Volodymyr”

Exactly, thus it would be transliterated as "Volodymyr" but usually romanized as "Wladimir" (at least in German).

Super Member
<a href="/it/translator/paotrlaouen" class="userpopupinfo username" rel="user1447583">PaotrLaouen</a>
Iscritto dal: 24.02.2020

If I am right, UNESCO has published rules for the translitteration of non-latin written languages in international institutions, and elsewhere.
Some may be different from what we are used to do in common usage. For instance, in Russian, they use "shch" where French-speaking people write "chtch".
However my opinion is that for the sake of uniformity we should comply with these rules.
In any case, the worst solution would be to use diacritics. Leave that to linguists and philologists (among whom I am!). Or else the only solution would be to use AIP/IPA's "alphabet".

Super Member
<a href="/it/translator/michael-didenko" class="userpopupinfo username" rel="user1414518">Michael Didenko</a>
Iscritto dal: 05.03.2019

It is transliterated as "Wladimir" not from the Ukrainian, but from the Russian language. In Ukrainian and Russian, these names are read in different ways, even though they are written in the same letters. The purpose of the letters in different Slavic languages is different! They indicate different sounds!

You can check the romanization of the Ukrainian name Володимир using the web-service of the State Migration Service of Ukraine https://dmsu.gov.ua/services/transliteration.html

Enter Зеленський in the left field (this is for family name), enter Володимир in the right field (this is for first name). Press “Перевірити” button (“Do check”). Then you can see the result of transliteration on the image of the passport of a citizen of Ukraine for traveling abroad.
The result of transliteration: Zelenskyi Volodymyr.

Also, here is a link to the resolution of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine “On the procedure for Latin transliteration of the Ukrainian alphabet”: https://zakon2.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/55-2010-п

Super Member
<a href="/it/translator/paotrlaouen" class="userpopupinfo username" rel="user1447583">PaotrLaouen</a>
Iscritto dal: 24.02.2020

What are we speaking about, exactly? Is it "translitteration" or "transcription"?
In the first case, it is only a matter of CONVENTIONAL correspondence between alphabets, no matter how the letters ar pronounced.
For instance, Greek "delta" is normally translitterated as "D", athough it is pronounced "th" (the voiced variant, as in "this').

Super Member
<a href="/it/translator/michael-didenko" class="userpopupinfo username" rel="user1414518">Michael Didenko</a>
Iscritto dal: 05.03.2019
Michael Didenko schrieb:

I don’t see much sense in transliteration at all. It is easier to learn the national alphabet than to understand what transliteration rules the author of transliteration was guided by.

Super Member
<a href="/it/translator/paotrlaouen" class="userpopupinfo username" rel="user1447583">PaotrLaouen</a>
Iscritto dal: 24.02.2020

Just think of the problems the librarians have to face to arrange authors' names in alphabetical order!

Super Member
<a href="/it/translator/michael-didenko" class="userpopupinfo username" rel="user1414518">Michael Didenko</a>
Iscritto dal: 05.03.2019

Some Ukrainian politicians, for whom the Ukrainian language is not native, became the heroes of jokes after trying to read the Ukrainian text, relying on their knowledge of the rules for reading the Russian language. The results of such attempts are often quite comical, because an incorrect reading leads to the utterance of a completely different word, in some cases from the category of obscene vocabulary.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HYuKkqFzv9I

Editor True-to-original translations.
<a href="/it/translator/michaelna" class="userpopupinfo username" rel="user1257575">MichaelNa</a>
Iscritto dal: 29.08.2015

If I see “Володимир” I would have no idea of the way it is pronounced. If I see a transliteration of it as “Volodimir” then I would have no problem following the recording of the song and possibly sing along with it.
I still would have no idea of what it’s saying but that is not the point of a transliteration. It’s merely to give an idea of the pronunciation of a piece that was originally written using an alphabet that one is not familiar with. The precise pronunciation can be discerned by listening to the recording and it really doesn’t matter if, in English, “Vladimir” would be more appropriate.

Super Member
<a href="/it/translator/michael-didenko" class="userpopupinfo username" rel="user1414518">Michael Didenko</a>
Iscritto dal: 05.03.2019

What kind of librarian will keep literature in different languages on the same shelf?

Super Member
<a href="/it/translator/michael-didenko" class="userpopupinfo username" rel="user1414518">Michael Didenko</a>
Iscritto dal: 05.03.2019

In fact, you will have a problem, because (as I wrote three times here) in Ukrainian Володимир is pronounced as Volodymyr, and not as Vladimir (Wladimir) or Volodimir. The letter "и" in the Ukrainian language denotes a sound different from that which it denotes in Russian. And therefore, it cannot be transliterated and must not be transliterated from Ukrainian into Latin with letter “i” as the automatic system of romanization on LyricsTranslate does.

Above, I provided a link to an official document, fixing at the legislative level the rules of transliteration from the Ukrainian language into the Latin alphabet.

Editor True-to-original translations.
<a href="/it/translator/michaelna" class="userpopupinfo username" rel="user1257575">MichaelNa</a>
Iscritto dal: 29.08.2015

I think you completely missed the point of what I wrote.

Super Member
<a href="/it/translator/paotrlaouen" class="userpopupinfo username" rel="user1447583">PaotrLaouen</a>
Iscritto dal: 24.02.2020

Most of them! Have you ever heard of things like the Library of Congress, the British Library, and so many others? As a professional, I have never heard of libraries sorting their books on the shelves according to the languages -- except for ancient manuscripts.
Moreover, the problem is not with shelves, but with catalogues -- either on paper or digitized.

Of course, the "alphabetical" approach may seem very formal, and irrelevant to those whose concern is only pronounciation.
Now, if I may enter in more personal considerations: I am a specialist of the Breton language (Brezhoneg), an endangered Celtic language spoken in the far-west part of France (Brittany). Although it is undoubtedly one single language, it is split into an infinity of dialects, with major differences in pronounciation, often at a distance of less than 30 km. (The grammar remains the same altogether.) Intense work have been displayed since the beginnings of the 19th cent. to set up an orthographic system which could allow to transcribe all words in the the same way, independently of their local pronounciation. Sticking to the oral forms would be a complete disaster, and the final wreck of this language within a few decades. (A process of the same kind is currently on its way for the Rheto-Romanic dialects in Switzerland.)
An what to do with the ancient, hieroglyphic Egyptian language, which can be dealt with by specialists who don't know exactly how it was pronounced?
What, again, with Latin, which is pronounced in so many different ways according to where you have studied it?

Super Member
<a href="/it/translator/michael-didenko" class="userpopupinfo username" rel="user1414518">Michael Didenko</a>
Iscritto dal: 05.03.2019

That is you who cannot understand that transliteration cannot give you an idea of pronunciation, because you do not know the rules that guided the author of transliteration.

If the Latin alphabet could give a correct idea of pronunciation, we would all do with only 26 letters of the Latin alphabet. Look at how many additional letters to the Latin are added in the national alphabets of European languages (even in German, not to mention the Slavic languages of the Western group). When transliterating the letters "и" from the Russian language, the Latin letter "i" is used, and when transliterating from the Ukrainian language, the letter "y" is used. So what? Does this help you understand what sounds are indicated by the letters "i" and "y" in transliteration. Is it clear to you how Ukrainian "и" and Russian "и" differ? The letter "и" is not the only problematic letter. In Slavic languages there are many unique sounds that cannot be indicated using the Latin alphabet. In fact, you have problems even voicing such names as Jose, since in Spanish and Catalan they are pronounced in different ways, although they are written in exactly the same way. Moreover, in both of these languages the Latin alphabet is used! For a correct understanding of the pronunciation of words, you need to familiarize yourself with the phonetic system of the language. But, if you do such a job, is it really difficult to familiarize yourself with the national alphabet of the language that is of interest to you?

Editor (Resident Evil)
<a href="/it/translator/magicmulder" class="userpopupinfo username" rel="user1264038">magicmulder</a>
Iscritto dal: 26.10.2015
PaotrLaouen wrote:

Intense work have been displayed since the beginnings of the 19th cent. to set up an orthographic system which could allow to transcribe all words in the the same way, independently of their local pronounciation. Sticking to the oral forms would be a complete disaster

I see this to a lesser extent with my local (Cologne) dialect ("Kölsch"). Since 1983, the "Akademie för uns Kölsche Sproch" has been compiling a dictionary that tries to transcribe the spoken dialect. There we also see a good example for the difference between transliteration and romanization: The dialect word for "gut" ("good") is written "god" (which would be pronounced like "gohd" but with a short "o") but is pronounced "jood" (or, phonetically for an English speaker, "yohd").

Super Member
<a href="/it/translator/michael-didenko" class="userpopupinfo username" rel="user1414518">Michael Didenko</a>
Iscritto dal: 05.03.2019
PaotrLaouen wrote:

Of course, the "alphabetical" approach may seem very formal, and irrelevant to those whose concern is only pronounciation.

The Ukrainian letter "и" cannot be transliterated into Latin "i" even formally, since this association is already occupied by the Ukrainian letter "і" with hex-code 0456 in Universal Character Set (Cyrillic Range: 0400–04FF).

Super Member
<a href="/it/translator/medograd" class="userpopupinfo username" rel="user1326265">Medograd</a>
Iscritto dal: 04.02.2017
Novice
<a href="/it/translator/vahid" class="userpopupinfo username" rel="user1362202">vahid</a>
Iscritto dal: 21.11.2017

I think you've missed the thread, you should report these things here: https://lyricstranslate.com/en/forum/incorrect-information-lyricstitleso...

Aggiungi un commento