User talk:Kmns tsw

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome!

Hello, Kmns tsw, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome!  -- JHunterJ 00:03, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

We on Wikipedia peg ourselves to the U. S. Library of Congress Hepburn standard. I checked and it only uses apostrophes with (n) - I personally like using apostrophes with i)(i and n)(n, but I did not know that LOC Hepburn does not call for that until recently. :) WhisperToMe 02:52, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

I said I was whipering. Anyway, I know there is little difference between wikipedian Hepburn system and that of LOC. Neither is good for transliteration of the Japanese syllabary. The controversy or strife between the two sects, one advocating the Hepburn system and the other for Nihon-shiki system was so long and vehement that people came to have a fixed idea that there could be no other solution excepting the two. The system I am advocating is a transliteration system of the full set of the Japanese Kana syllabary. I am awkawrd in writing English. I wish you can read my comments at [Frog in a Well].Kmns tsw 06:51, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] transliteration help

Thank you and welcome to Wikipedia! Chris (talk) 16:34, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

You are welcome. By the way, you can find the transliteration table of the full set of the Kana syllabary at [EHS(Extended Hepburn System)]. It works two ways. Please read it. I am sure you will find it interesting. Kmns tsw (talk) 03:46, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

I'm glad I learned about the system (so I can make more redirects) but I have a feeling that Wikipedia will still use U.S. LOC Hepburn. Notice that JR and many other organizations use Standard Hepburn. The kind used casually can be called a "modified" form of Hepburn that does not use macrons but uses other features of Hepburn.

In short I think "nihonzhin" is less common than "nihonjin." WhisperToMe (talk) 06:02, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Alternative romanization

→ ja:Wikipedia:独自研究は載せない. Jpatokal (talk) 17:46, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

→ja:利用者‐会話:Kmns#警告 222.145.139.116 (talk) 19:56, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

I don't deny it is an original idea. And I am not trying to write anything about it either as an article or as a part of an article of Wikipedia. Only I believe you would find it interesting, and that it might throw some light on the recurring questions of the romanization such as macron etc.--Kmns tsw (talk) 13:21, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Kana and Romanization

Thank you for letting me know. Is there something I have transliterated incorrectly? Chris (クリス • フィッチ) (talk) 20:41, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

No, nothing of that kind. It may sound ridiculous but if asked why I am writing about Kana and romanization, I would say I am not sure of the purpose myself. What I want to say might be boiled down to that transliteration of Kana script could be phonetically reliable if the base be the Classical one, otherwise not. Allow me to use my method to show Kana script. The "oo" of Gendai or Present-Day KANA which comes from "o`o" of the Old or Classical Kana was not supposed to represent a long vowel by those specialists employed by the Ministry of Education. cf [|『言葉に關する問答集』總集編] p.416 but most of the "ou" of Gendai Kana could be regarded as representing a long vowel if it came from "au" of the Classical Kana. About the last statement about "ou", ask any Japanese around you. Anyway, it is very risky to induce phonetic values from Gendai Kana alone.--Kmns tsw (talk) 07:02, 2 April 2008 (UTC)