How would you romanize Kazakh?

A forum for discussing linguistics or just languages in general.
User avatar
Vlürch
sinic
sinic
Posts: 327
Joined: 09 Mar 2016 21:19
Location: Finland
Contact:

Re: How would you romanize Kazakh?

Post by Vlürch »

I know bumping a year-old thread is annoying, but making a new thread seems unnecessary considering this one already exists. Hopefully it's fine, since I feel like this topic is just as relevant now as it was a year ago.

At least for now, they seem to be still using the old Cyrillic alphabet alongside the new Latin one. Apparently it's like this only for a transitional period of six years, though, during which they'll force everyone to embrace the awful new alphabet...? Apparently they'll also be somehow trying to eliminate Russian influence.

But seriously, is there any hope that they'll realise the new alphabet sucks? I mean, I get that random language nerds who've never even been to Kazakhstan complaining about it online could be seen as being almost as imperialist as the Russian Empire's invasion of the country once upon a time, but still... I just hate seeing languages being flushed down the toilet, which I know nobody cares about except other random language nerds while most Kazakhs themselves are probably happy with it? But ugh.

Anyway, I think the simplest fix for the current mess would be to just reorganise their chosen letters and get rid of the dotless I:
1) first do what everyone's already said and replace <ý> with <w>
2) replace <w> with <u> between consonants and word-finally
3) replace <ı> with <ý> à la Turkmen; <я ё ю> become <ýa ýo ýu> but <и> becomes <yý>
4) word-initial <е> as <ýe> would match phonetics better
5) when the word has front vowels before it, replace <yý> with <iý>
6) between consonants, romanise <и> as <i>
7) romanise <ң> as <n> before <k g q ǵ> and <ń> elsewhere
User avatar
Creyeditor
MVP
MVP
Posts: 4002
Joined: 14 Aug 2012 19:32

Re: How would you romanize Kazakh?

Post by Creyeditor »

Just wanted to mention that the actual phonemic system of vowels in Kazakh seems to be debated, as well as the vowel harmony facts (and relatedly, some consonant pattens). Might be a reason for confusing orthography.
Creyeditor
"Thoughts are free."
Produce, Analyze, Manipulate
1 :deu: 2 :eng: 3 :idn: 4 :fra: 4 :esp:
:con: Ook & Omlűt & Nautli languages & Sperenjas
[<3] Papuan languages, Morphophonology, Lexical Semantics [<3]
User avatar
Vlürch
sinic
sinic
Posts: 327
Joined: 09 Mar 2016 21:19
Location: Finland
Contact:

Re: How would you romanize Kazakh?

Post by Vlürch »

Just now, I randomly came across an article in Karakalpak (written in the Cyrillic script) and decided to look up if they also have a Latin alternative... welp, turns out their alphabet is being reformed in a way that's similar to the reformed Kazakh Latin alphabet, only it may be even worse when it comes to the I's and actually predates the Kazakh reform if Wikipedia is to be trusted.

Apparently, it uses <Ii> for /i/ and <Íı> for /ɯ/... like, what. [>_<] I mean, at least the lowercase forms are just right and it uses <y> for /j/ so I'm not saying it's worse overall, but the mismatch between case forms is definitely even more nonsensical; why not just use <Íí> for /ɯ/, which would allow /i/ to be romanised <Ii> without issue? Or the opposite, in which case the acute accent would unambiguously signify fronting of vowels? I guess the destruction of aesthetics and practicality is now a top priority for the Turkic deciders.

I wonder when the Kyrgyz will decide to switch to a Latin alphabet, and how bad it wil be...
Creyeditor wrote: 20 Apr 2019 09:49Just wanted to mention that the actual phonemic system of vowels in Kazakh seems to be debated, as well as the vowel harmony facts (and relatedly, some consonant pattens). Might be a reason for confusing orthography.
Seems so (same with Uzbek), but there's no justifiable reason for them to use <ı> for /j/ under any circumstances and not use <w> for /w/, especially since they're not using <w> for anything else.
User avatar
Xonen
moderator
moderator
Posts: 1066
Joined: 16 May 2010 00:25

Re: How would you romanize Kazakh?

Post by Xonen »

Vlürch wrote: 20 Apr 2019 05:01I know bumping a year-old thread is annoying, but making a new thread seems unnecessary considering this one already exists. Hopefully it's fine
Let's check the rules of the Internet:
Spoiler:
Image
Note the bit "Post must be inane and not significantly contribute to the discussion". Injecting a short and/or otherwise pointless post into a dead thread will accomplish nothing but raise its putrid husk to shamble aimlessly among the living, leaving confusion and dismay in its wake. By contrast, properly preparing a meaningful response to the thread will genuinely revive and restore it to serve its original purpose once more.

So yeah, it's fine. In fact, at least on this board, it's generally preferable to bump an old thread rather than post a new one on the same subject. Saves us mods the trouble of having to merge them. [¬.¬]
anlztrk
rupestrian
rupestrian
Posts: 2
Joined: 28 Oct 2015 19:04

Re: How would you romanize Kazakh?

Post by anlztrk »

I know I already posted in this thread, but I came up with this system the other day and to me it just looks fantastic, if a bit Slavic influenced. I don't see any reason for non-Oghuz Turkic languages to use the Common Turkic Alphabet anyway.

/m n ŋ/ <m n ň>
/p b t d k ɡ q/ <p b t d k g q>
/*t͡s *t͡ɕ/ <c č>
/*f *v s z ʃ ʒ *ɕ *x ʁ *h/ <f v s z š ž ś x ǧ h>
/l j w/ <l j w>
/r/ <r>

/ɘ~ɪ ʉ ə ʊ/ <i ü y u>
/əj~ɘj ʊw~əw~ʉw~ɘw <ī ū>
/i̯ɘ y̯ʉ~ø~œ u̯o/ <e ö o>
/*i̯e/ <e>
/æ ɑ/ <ä a>
/*jo jʊw~jəw~jʉw~jɘw jɑ/ <jo jū ja>

Сотта Тұрсынкүл Жоланова «Жалғыз басты анамын, бір баламды жалғыз асырап отырмын. Кейде жейтін тамағымыз болмай қалады. Үкіметке наразылығымды айтқым келді. Президентімді өзім қалап сайлағым келеді. 30 жылдың ішінде сайлауға барып Назарбаевқа дауыс берген емеспін» деді.

Sotta Tursynkül Žolanova “Žalǧyz basty anamyn, bir balamdy žalǧyz asyrap otyrmyn. Kejde žejtin tamaǧymyz bolmaj qalady. Ükimetke narazylyǧymdy ajtqym keldi. Prezīdentimdi özim qalap sajlaǧym keledi. 30 žyldyň išinde sajlawǧa baryp Nazarbaevqa dawys bergen emespin” dedi.


I'd rather just keep the Cyrillic script though, which is probably what they'll eventually decide anyway.
Zythros Jubi
sinic
sinic
Posts: 410
Joined: 24 Nov 2014 17:31

Re: How would you romanize Kazakh?

Post by Zythros Jubi »

/m n ŋ/ <m n ng>
/p b t d k ɡ q/ <p b t d k g q>
/*t͡s *t͡ɕ/ <ts tc>
/*f *v s z ʃ ʒ *ɕ *x ʁ *h/ <f v s z c j cc/ctc h gh h>
/l j w/ <l y w>
/r/ <r>

/ɘ~ɪ ʉ ə ʊ/ <i ü ï u>
/əj~ɘj ʊw~əw~ʉw~ɘw <y w>
/i̯ɘ y̯ʉ~ø~œ u̯o/ <e ö o>
/*i̯e/ <ä>
/æ ɑ/ <ä a>
/*jo jʊw~jəw~jʉw~jɘw jɑ/ <yo yw ya>

Сотта Тұрсынкүл Жоланова «Жалғыз басты анамын, бір баламды жалғыз асырап отырмын. Кейде жейтін тамағымыз болмай қалады. Үкіметке наразылығымды айтқым келді. Президентімді өзім қалап сайлағым келеді. 30 жылдың ішінде сайлауға барып Назарбаевқа дауыс берген емеспін» деді.

Sotta Tursïnkül Jolanova «Jalghïz bastï anamïn, bir balamdï jalghïz asïrap otïrmïn. Keyde jeytin tamaghïmïz bolmay qaladï. Ükimetke narazïlïghïmdï aytqïm keldi. Prezydentimdi özim qalap saylaghïm keledi. 30 jïldïng ïcinde saylawgha barïp Nazarbaevqa dawïs bergen emespin» dedi.
Lostlang plans: Oghur Turkic, Gallaecian Celtic, Palaeo-Balkanic
dva_arla
cuneiform
cuneiform
Posts: 101
Joined: 25 Oct 2019 21:03
Location: Realm of Ideas

Re: How would you romanize Kazakh?

Post by dva_arla »

Chagatai, anybody?

Барлық адамдар тумысынан* азат және қадір-қасиеті мен кұқықтары тең болып дүниеге келеді. Адамдарға ақыл-парасат**, ар-ождан берілген, сондықтан олар бір-бірімен туыстық, бауырмалдық*** қарым-қатынас**** жасаулары тиіс.

بارلق آدملر توعُمسنن* آزاد جنه قادرــــــخاصيتی من حقوقلری تڭ بولب دنياَغه كله‌دی. آدملرغه عقلــــپـاراسات**، آر وجدان بريلگن، سونلقدن ولر برـــــبريمن تووسلق، باعُرماللق*** قارمــــــقاتناس**** جاساعُلري تييس

*Is -ан a suffix that varies with -ен?
**Is парасат a Persian loanword, or a Turkic construction? If the latter, what elements are the word consisted of?
*** Is -мал a suffix or a bahuvrihi-element, and does -дик here come from -dıq or -lıq?
**** Is the -нас a suffix?

As you can see, the alphabet is morpho-etymological in nature; spelling of suffixes are morphophonemic, so that (for instance) the plural suffix varying as -лар -лер -дар -дер are spelt consistently as لر ; hence the questions above. Orthography of Persian loanwords have been retained, and the separate letter عُ has been used to represent -w coming from Turkic -ğ (cf. English though, dough, rough).
gokupwned5
sinic
sinic
Posts: 299
Joined: 12 Aug 2016 16:05

Re: How would you romanize Kazakh?

Post by gokupwned5 »

/p b t d (tɕ) k g q ɢ/ <p b t d (ç) k g q ġ>
/f v s~θ z~ð ʃ ʒ (ɕ x) h/ <f v s z ş j (ś x) h>
/m n ŋ/ <m n ng>
/r l j w/ <r l y w>
-RTR: /æ ɘ ʉ i̯ɘ y̯ʉ/ <ä e u i iu>
+RTR: /ɑ ə ʊ u̯ʊ/ <a ı o uo>

/bɑrləq ɑdɑmdɑr tʊməsənɑn ɑzɑt ʒæni̯ɘ qɑdɘr-qɑsəji̯ɘtɘ mi̯ɘn kʊqəqtɑrə ti̯ɘŋ bu̯ʊləp dʉnəji̯ɘgi̯ɘ ki̯ɘli̯ɘdi̯ɘ ɑdɑmdɑrɢɑ ɑqəlpɑrɑsɑt ɑru̯ʊʒdɑn bi̯ɘrɘlgi̯ɘn su̯ʊndəqtɑn u̯ʊlɑr bɘrbɘrɘmi̯ɘn twəstəq bɑwərmɑldəq qɑrəm-qɑtənɑs ʒɑsɑwlɑrə təjɘs/

Barlıq adamdar tomısınan azat jäni qadır-qasıyite min koqıqtarı ting buolıp dunıyigi kilidi. Adamdarġa aqıl-parasat, ar-uojdan birelgin, suondıqtan uolar ber-beremin twıstıq, bawırmaldıq qarım-qatınas jasawları tıyes.
User avatar
qwed117
mongolian
mongolian
Posts: 3755
Joined: 20 Nov 2014 02:27

Re: How would you romanize Kazakh?

Post by qwed117 »

gokupwned5 wrote: 05 May 2020 18:09 /p b t d (tɕ) k g q ɢ/ <p b t d (ç) k g q ġ>
/f v s~θ z~ð ʃ ʒ (ɕ x) h/ <f v s z ş j (ś x) h>
/m n ŋ/ <m n ng>
/r l j w/ <r l y w>
-RTR: /æ ɘ ʉ i̯ɘ y̯ʉ/ <ä e u i iu>
+RTR: /ɑ ə ʊ u̯ʊ/ <a ı o uo>

/bɑrləq ɑdɑmdɑr tʊməsənɑn ɑzɑt ʒæni̯ɘ qɑdɘr-qɑsəji̯ɘtɘ mi̯ɘn kʊqəqtɑrə ti̯ɘŋ bu̯ʊləp dʉnəji̯ɘgi̯ɘ ki̯ɘli̯ɘdi̯ɘ ɑdɑmdɑrɢɑ ɑqəlpɑrɑsɑt ɑru̯ʊʒdɑn bi̯ɘrɘlgi̯ɘn su̯ʊndəqtɑn u̯ʊlɑr bɘrbɘrɘmi̯ɘn twəstəq bɑwərmɑldəq qɑrəm-qɑtənɑs ʒɑsɑwlɑrə təjɘs/

Barlıq adamdar tomısınan azat jäni qadır-qasıyite min koqıqtarı ting buolıp dunıyigi kilidi. Adamdarġa aqıl-parasat, ar-uojdan birelgin, suondıqtan uolar ber-beremin twıstıq, bawırmaldıq qarım-qatınas jasawları tıyes.
Based on this, I would go for something like this just to avoid diacritics

/p b t d (tɕ) k g q ɢ/ <p b t d (ç) k g q gq>
/f v s~θ z~ð ʃ ʒ (ɕ x) h/ <f v s z sh zh (x kh) h>
/m n ŋ/ <m n ng>
/r l j w/ <r l y w>
-RTR: /æ ɘ ʉ i̯ɘ y̯ʉ/ <ai ei ui ie iu>
+RTR: /ɑ ə ʊ u̯ʊ/ <a e o u>

/bɑrləq ɑdɑmdɑr tʊməsənɑn ɑzɑt ʒæni̯ɘ qɑdɘr-qɑsəji̯ɘtɘ mi̯ɘn kʊqəqtɑrə ti̯ɘŋ bu̯ʊləp dʉnəji̯ɘgi̯ɘ ki̯ɘli̯ɘdi̯ɘ ɑdɑmdɑrɢɑ ɑqəlpɑrɑsɑt ɑru̯ʊʒdɑn bi̯ɘrɘlgi̯ɘn su̯ʊndəqtɑn u̯ʊlɑr bɘrbɘrɘmi̯ɘn twəstəq bɑwərmɑldəq qɑrəm-qɑtənɑs ʒɑsɑwlɑrə təjɘs/

barleq adamdar tomesenan azat zhainie qader-qaseyietei mien koqeqtare tieng bulep duineyiegie kieliedie adamdargqa aqelparasat aruzhdan biereilgien sundeqtan ular berberemien twesteq bawermaldeq qarem-qatenas zhasawlare teyeis
Spoiler:
My minicity is Zyphrazia and Novland
What is made of man will crumble away.
User avatar
All4Ɇn
mayan
mayan
Posts: 1587
Joined: 01 Mar 2014 07:19

Re: How would you romanize Kazakh?

Post by All4Ɇn »

Good news! The Kazakh government is going through more orthography reforms. The current proposed orthography right now looks like the one below. It's very possible some things will change before ratification though. It's a lot closer to Turkish now.

/m n ŋ/ <m n n ŋ>
/p b t d k ɡ q/ <p b t d k g q>
/(t͡ɕ)/ <ç>
/f v s z ʃ ʒ (x) ʁ h/ <f v s z ş j h ğ h>
/l j w/ <l ı w>
/r/ <r>

/ɘ~ɪ ʉ ə ʊ/ <i ü y u>
/əj~ɘj ʊw~əw~ʉw~ɘw <ı w>
/i̯ɘ y̯ʉ~ø~œ u̯o/ <е ö о>
/æ ɑ/ <ä а>


Barlyq adamdar twmysynan azat jänе qadir-qasıеti mеn kuqyqtary tеŋ bolyp dünıеgе kеlеdi. Adamdarğa aqyl-parasat, ar-ojdan bеrilgеn, sondyqtan olar bir-birimеn twystyq, bawyrmaldyq qarym-qatynas jasawlary tıis.


It's also worth noting the interesting alphabet order:
Aa Ää Bb Çç Dd Ee Ff Gg Ğğ Hh İi Iı Yy Jj Kk Qq Ll Mm Nn Ŋŋ Oo Öö Pp Rr Ss Şş Tt Uu Üü Vv Ww Zz


Definitely prefer this to their last system [:D]
Last edited by All4Ɇn on 22 Jun 2020 19:42, edited 3 times in total.
User avatar
Pabappa
sinic
sinic
Posts: 439
Joined: 18 Nov 2017 02:41
Contact:

Re: How would you romanize Kazakh?

Post by Pabappa »

i think you made a coiple of typos but thank you. the biggest surprise for me is the use of ŋ ... Im sure there are some but offhand I cant name a single national language that uses ŋ in its alphabet. Im glad the apostrophes came off, too.... but also not surprised.
I'll take the theses, and you can have the thoses.
User avatar
All4Ɇn
mayan
mayan
Posts: 1587
Joined: 01 Mar 2014 07:19

Re: How would you romanize Kazakh?

Post by All4Ɇn »

Pabappa wrote: 19 Jun 2020 04:43 i think you made a coiple of typos but thank you. the biggest surprise for me is the use of ŋ ... Im sure there are some but offhand I cant name a single national language that uses ŋ in its alphabet. Im glad the apostrophes came off, too.... but also not surprised.
<ŋ> is definitely an interesting choice for it. I imagine the goal with the most recent attempt was to make it more resemble an orthography and less of a romanization. I think in most respects they've moved towards that, but <ŋ> strikes me as a character that has the opposite effect. It is a nice callback to its Cyrillic form though.
User avatar
Xonen
moderator
moderator
Posts: 1066
Joined: 16 May 2010 00:25

Re: How would you romanize Kazakh?

Post by Xonen »

All4Ɇn wrote: 19 Jun 2020 04:38/m n ŋ/ <m n n ŋ>
/p b t d k ɡ q/ <p b t d k q>
/(t͡ɕ)/ <ç>
/f v s z ʃ ʒ (x) ʁ h/ <g v s z ş j h ğ h>
/l j w/ <l ı w>
/r/ <р>

/ɘ~ɪ ʉ ə ʊ/ <i ü y u>
/əj~ɘj ʊw~əw~ʉw~ɘw <ı w>
/i̯ɘ y̯ʉ~ø~œ u̯o/ <е ö о>
/æ ɑ/ <ä а>
That usage of <y> and <ı> seems kind of... exactly backward from what I'd expect, both based on Turkish and just intuitively. But apart from that little detail, seems fairly decent to me; definitely an enormous improvement. (Well, assuming that <g> is supposed to be <f>, and the second <p> is likewise a typo for <r> and not the Kazakhs deciding to keep the Cyrillic <р> for no reason.)


Pabappa wrote: 19 Jun 2020 04:43i think you made a coiple of typos
I'm tempted to pount oit something here, but oh well...
the biggest surprise for me is the use of ŋ ... Im sure there are some but offhand I cant name a single national language that uses ŋ in its alphabet.
I did a bit of digging on Wikipedia, and yeah, <ŋ> seems to be used in various (mostly minority) languages all around the globe, but Kazakh's status as the primary state language of an independent country might be fairly unique among them. I'm guessing it has to do with it being a fairly new letter, so it's only used in newer orthographies - and then only if the language has a phoneme that it's a sensible representation for (i.e. usually /ŋ/), which a lot of languages don't. Most established national languages have had established orthographies as well since before the idea of using <ŋ> was really available, and certainly since before people stopped being averse to using letters that most printers wouldn't have suitable type for.

However, a bunch of those African languages do have the status of a "recognized national language" (or something to that effect) in their countries. Typically, that status seems to be shared among several local languages, while the old colonial language (English or French, usually) functions as the official state language.
ɶʙ ɞʛ
sinic
sinic
Posts: 284
Joined: 02 Aug 2019 18:47

Re: How would you romanize Kazakh?

Post by ɶʙ ɞʛ »

/m n ŋ/ <m n ŋ>
/p b t d k ɡ q ɢ/ <p b t d k g q ĝ>
/(ts t͡ɕ)/ <c ç>
/f v s z ʃ ʒ (x) ʁ h/ <f v s z ş j x ğ h>
/l j w/ <l y w>
/r/ <r>

/ɘ~ɪ ʉ ə ʊ/ <i ü ı u>
/əj~ɘj ʊw~əw~ʉw~ɘw <e o>
/i̯ɘ y̯ʉ~ø~œ u̯o/ <í ö ó>
/æ ɑ/ <ə а>

bʊrəŋɢə y̯ʉtki̯ɘn zɑmɑndɑ, bɘr dɑnəʃpɑn kɘsɘ, bɑɢdɑt ʃɑhɑrənəŋ bɘr ʉlki̯ɘn qɑzəsənəŋ ʉjɘni̯ɘ ki̯ɘlɘp qu̯ʊnəptə. qɑzəmi̯ɘni̯ɘn sy̯ʉjli̯ɘsɘp, qɑzənə sy̯ʉzгi̯ɘ ʒi̯ɘŋi̯ɘ bi̯ɘrɘptɘ.

Burınĝı ötkín zamanda, bir danışpan kisi, baĝdat şaharınıŋ bir ülkín qazısınıŋ üyiní kílip qónıptı. Qazımínín söylísip, qazını sözĝí jíŋí bíripti.
User avatar
All4Ɇn
mayan
mayan
Posts: 1587
Joined: 01 Mar 2014 07:19

Re: How would you romanize Kazakh?

Post by All4Ɇn »

Xonen wrote: 21 Jun 2020 22:15(Well, assuming that <g> is supposed to be <f>, and the second <p> is likewise a typo for <r> and not the Kazakhs deciding to keep the Cyrillic <р> for no reason.)
How embarrassing [:$]. Fixed those changes. No idea how I wasn't able to spot them at all.
Xonen wrote: 21 Jun 2020 22:15That usage of <y> and <ı> seems kind of... exactly backward from what I'd expect, both based on Turkish and just intuitively.
To me it's particularly an interesting choice because of <ı> also representing /j/ seeing as how common <y> is for expressing that phoneme.
Tsuchidaai
rupestrian
rupestrian
Posts: 6
Joined: 18 Jun 2020 09:56

Re: How would you romanize Kazakh?

Post by Tsuchidaai »

Try to Romanize this with acute series

/m n ŋ/ <m n ń>
/p b t d k ɡ q ɢ/ <p b t d k g q x>
/(ts t͡ɕ)/ <c ć>
/f v s z ʃ ʒ (x) ʁ h/ <f v s z ś ź ḱ ǵ h>
/l j w/ <l j w>
/r/ <r>

/ɘ~ɪ ʉ ə ʊ/ <í ý i u>
/əj~ɘj ʊw~əw~ʉw~ɘw/ <e o>
/i̯ɘ y̯ʉ~ø~œ u̯o/ <é y ú ó>
/æ ɑ/ <á а>

It may easy to pronounce that, acute meaning new letter as nukta on Devanagari or Indic alphabets.

It’s a good idea when Kazakh transliterated into Latin.
User avatar
Vlürch
sinic
sinic
Posts: 327
Joined: 09 Mar 2016 21:19
Location: Finland
Contact:

Re: How would you romanize Kazakh?

Post by Vlürch »

They're already using <h> for two consonants, one of which occurs only in loanwords, so why not also use <v> for two consonants, one of which also occurs only in loanwords? If they wanted to have <y> as a vowel without causing confusion, using <z̧> for /ʒ/ would be consistent with <ş> for /ʃ/ and then they could use <j> for /j/. Using <i u> for <и у> would be analogous to the use of <h> for two sounds, too.

/m n ŋ/ <m n ŋ>
/p b t d k ɡ q/ <p b t d k g q>
/(t͡ɕ)/ <ç>
/f v s z ʃ ʒ (x) ʁ h/ <f v s z ş z̧ h ğ h>
/l j w/ <l j v>
/r/ <r>

/ɘ~ɪ ʉ ə ʊ/ <i ü y u>
/əj~ɘj ʊw~əw~ʉw~ɘw <i u>
/i̯ɘ y̯ʉ~ø~œ u̯o/ <е ö о>
/æ ɑ/ <ä а>

Using <ŋ> for /ŋ/ really is interesting. If they'd used <z̧> for /ʒ/, using <ņ> for /ŋ/ would've looked pretty cool, but I don't think there's any hope of any major language's orthography ever using <z̧> since it's not a precomposed character in Unicode... [:'(]
Xonen wrote: 21 Jun 2020 22:15That usage of <y> and <ı> seems kind of... exactly backward from what I'd expect, both based on Turkish and just intuitively. But apart from that little detail, seems fairly decent to me; definitely an enormous improvement.
Agreed 100%, it's so weird. I wonder if there's some reason for it that hasn't been published? Like, why would they still cling to that of all things if they've already thrown everything Nazarbayev wanted out the window?
User avatar
jimydog000
sinic
sinic
Posts: 330
Joined: 19 Mar 2016 04:14
Location: Australian Country

Re: How would you romanize Kazakh?

Post by jimydog000 »

/m n ŋ/ <m n ng>
/p b t d k ɡ q/ <p b t d k g q>
/(t͡s t͡ɕ)/ <(ts ch)>
/(f v) s z ʃ ʒ ɕ* x ʁ *h/ <(f v) s z sh jh (sh) x gh (x)>
/l j w/ <l y w>
/r/ <r>

[Front] /æ i̯ɘ ɘ~ɪ y̯ʉ~ø~œ ʉ/ <ä ë i ö ü>
[Back] /а ə u̯o ʊ/ <a e o u>
["Neutral"] /əj~ɘj ʊw~əw~ʉw~ɘw/ <ey ow>

AFAIK and researched, /æ/ can only be in the first syllable and patterns in vowel harmony with other vowels as if it were /i̯ɘ/.
And '/i̯ɘ/' is sometimes transcribed as /jɪ/ and the reasoning for this is influence from Russian gave /e/ an on-glide. And then to make it more confusing some sources have <э> for /e/ or even /ɛ/.
Failed Attempts:
/m n ŋ/ <m n ň>
/p b t d k ɡ q/ <p b t d k g q>
/*t͡s *t͡ɕ/ <tc tš>
/*f *v s z ʃ ʒ ɕ* x ʁ *h/ <(f v) s z š j (š) x ğ (x)>
/l j w/ <l y w>
/r/ <r>
<ъ~ь> <h>

/æ i̯ɘ ɘ~ɪ y̯ʉ~ø~œ ʉ/ <ä ë i ü y>
/а, ə u̯o ʊ/ <a e o u>
/əj~ɘj ʊw~əw~ʉw~ɘw/ <ē ō>

And again, only because I like the idea of orthographic <ŋ> and some other special characters.
There are some keyboards out there with <ŋ>.

/m n ŋ/ <m n ŋ>
/p b t d k ɡ q/ <p b t d k g q>
/*t͡s *t͡ɕ/ <tc tš>
/*f *v s z ʃ ʒ ɕ* x ʁ *h/ <(f v) s z ç j (š) x ğ (h)>
/l j w/ <l y w>
/r/ <r>

Front: <ә e i ө ү>/æ i̯ɘ ɘ~ɪ y̯ʉ~ø~œ ʉ/ <æ ë i ü y>
Back: <а ы о ұ>/а ə u̯o ʊ/ <a e o u>
"Neutral": <и у>/əj~ɘj ʊw~əw~ʉw~ɘw/ <ē ō>
Post Reply