Max_valk Posted January 23, 2006 Share Posted January 23, 2006 Now I have no clue what you're saying. In one post, you quote the kana for fu/hu (where U definately makes the sound as in blue, too, shoe), and then you say it's something else entirely. First get your sh!t together, then post a reply. 363226[/snapback] I am not accustomed to people who are being rude or use profanity. Ask another Japanese person or live in Japan. (if anyone would accept that kind of manner there). You didn't learn the language properly and pretend to know better than native. Learning from books is not the same as real life learning. Bye! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keith Posted January 23, 2006 Share Posted January 23, 2006 Now I have no clue what you're saying. In one post, you quote the kana for fu/hu (where U definately makes the sound as in blue, too, shoe), and then you say it's something else entirely. First get your sh!t together, then post a reply. 363226[/snapback] I am not accustomed to people who are being rude or use profanity. Ask another Japanese person or live in Japan. (if anyone would accept that kind of manner there). You didn't learn the language properly and pretend to know better than native. Learning from books is not the same as real life learning. Bye! 363230[/snapback] Who used profanity, an exclamation point isn't even a letter! That however doesn't answer my question... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Final Vegeta Posted January 23, 2006 Share Posted January 23, 2006 A = "ah" E = "eh" I = "ee (as in bee or tree)" O= "oh (as in toe, or bow)" U= "ooh (as in shoe, or blue)"This applies in finnish also, almost at least 363214[/snapback] Also in Italian. There is just some slight distintion in words like "pesca", which is written in the same way but depending on the pronunciation of the "e" can mean two different things. All in all though, Italian has very little omophones to care about, so the pronounce of vowels doesn't need that many nuances. Btw, this reminds of a piece of spelling reform satire, attributed to Mark Twain: For example, in Year 1 that useless letter "c" would be dropped to be replased either by "k" or "s," and likewise "x" would no longer be part of the alphabet. The only kase in which "c" would be retained would be the "ch" formation, which will be dealt with later. Year 2 might reform "w" spelling, so that "which" and "one" would take the same konsonant, wile Year 3 might well abolish "y" replasing it with "i" and Iear 4 might fiks the "g / j" anomali wonse and for all. Jenerally, then, the improvement would kontinue iear bai iear with Iear 5 doing awai with useless double konsonants, and Iears 6-12 or so modifaiing vowlz and the rimeining voist and unvoist konsonants. Bai Iear 15 or sou, it wud fainali bi posibl tu meik ius ov thi ridandant letez "c," "y," and "x" - bai now jast a memori in the maindz ov ould doderez - tu riplais "ch," "sh," and "th" rispektivli. Fainali, xen, aafte sam 20 iers ov orxogrefkl riform, wi wud hev a lojikl, kohirnt speling in ius xrewawt xe Ingliy-spiking werld. FV Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sdf-1 Posted January 23, 2006 Share Posted January 23, 2006 For example, in Year 1 that useless letter "c" would be dropped to be replased either by "k" or "s," and likewise "x" would no longer be part of the alphabet. The only kase in which "c" would be retained would be the "ch" formation, which will be dealt with later. Year 2 might reform "w" spelling, so that "which" and "one" would take the same konsonant, wile Year 3 might well abolish "y" replasing it with "i" and Iear 4 might fiks the "g / j" anomali wonse and for all.Jenerally, then, the improvement would kontinue iear bai iear with Iear 5 doing awai with useless double konsonants, and Iears 6-12 or so modifaiing vowlz and the rimeining voist and unvoist konsonants. Bai Iear 15 or sou, it wud fainali bi posibl tu meik ius ov thi ridandant letez "c," "y," and "x" - bai now jast a memori in the maindz ov ould doderez - tu riplais "ch," "sh," and "th" rispektivli. Fainali, xen, aafte sam 20 iers ov orxogrefkl riform, wi wud hev a lojikl, kohirnt speling in ius xrewawt xe Ingliy-spiking werld. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VT 1010 Posted January 24, 2006 Share Posted January 24, 2006 For English speakers, R would be pronounced with a small L, that 's also why some English words such as "Eric Clapton" becomes "Eric Crapton" or Rider is pronounced Laidaa. 362799[/snapback] "Ya got me on my knees, Reraa! " I agree with Max Valk for the most part. I am by no means fluent in Japanese, but I do know some (my instructor also happens to be Japanese). In order for foreign words to fit in with the Japanese language, they have to be changed, as do other languages (luckily, English is fairly flexible, so we don't encounter it too often). However, we're trying to figure out the English interpretation of the Japanese interpretation of a Dutch (it is Dutch, isn't it?) name. It's bound to be confusing. Anybody have the Froating Head's e-mail? Maybe he could sort this out... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
azrael Posted January 24, 2006 Share Posted January 24, 2006 Why don't I just call Egan Loo, drag his little ass down here and correct us all like he normally does. Would that help? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ghostryder Posted January 24, 2006 Author Share Posted January 24, 2006 Okay, I got lost after post 22..... So what I gather is that when a sound is translated into and "L" character, it may have been intended to be pronounced like an "R"?? That would make sense, since "Microne" makes more sense than "Miclone"..., unless they were word-playing micronize and clone. But then Komillia isn't supposed to sound like "Komiriya"!..... crap, I give up Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phyrox Posted January 24, 2006 Share Posted January 24, 2006 I know this is a late addition, but my Japanese tutor always told me that the Japanese R/L sound is really sort of half way between the two sounds in english.* That's the way I always try to pronounce them at least. I never understand when people insist on romanizing with one and never the other. (like some people insist on doing with the mospeada TREAD, calling it TLEAD). Neither letter is really any more accurate pronounciation-wise than the other, so use whichever makes more sense. * - In american english your mouth and vocal chords to the same thing for both letter sounds, but your tongue is in a different position. Touching the top behind the teeth for L, further back and not touching for R. The Japanese sound, at least according to my tutor, and my ears, requires the tongue to be in an intermediate position between those two (almost touching the roof, and a bit behind where it would be for the L sound. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JB0 Posted January 25, 2006 Share Posted January 25, 2006 I know this is a late addition, but my Japanese tutor always told me that the Japanese R/L sound is really sort of half way between the two sounds in english.* That's the way I always try to pronounce them at least.I never understand when people insist on romanizing with one and never the other. (like some people insist on doing with the mospeada TREAD, calling it TLEAD). Neither letter is really any more accurate pronounciation-wise than the other, so use whichever makes more sense. Like I said, it's funnier with TREAD, since it's an english-word acronym. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.