Best romanizations of Abjads & Abugidas?
Best romanizations of Abjads & Abugidas?
Currently I've been working in my conlang a way to transcribe the various scripts around the world into the Latin script to suite my alphabet. The one's that I have been having trouble making are the ones for the Abjads and the Abugidas. Does anyone know what the best romanizations for these are? By that I mean it is read as it is pronounced and the rules are for the most part set in stone.
Re: Best romanizations of Abjads & Abugidas?
Every romanisation of abjads and abugidas I've ever seen more or less just treats them as if they were alphabets, i.e. consonants are written as if they were consonants and diacritics representing vowels are represented with full vowel letters. With abjads that don't write vowels, I've seen only the consonant represented so that, for example, the Arabic word for "subscription", when written مكتتب is romanised as <mkttb>, but romanised as <muktatib> when written مُكتَتِب. Taking an example from the abugida Ge'ez, አቡጊዳ is transliterated as <’äbugida> but not as <'bgd>, with the obligatory vowel marking on each base consonant being treated a if it were a vowel letter itself.
You can tell the same lie a thousand times,
But it never gets any more true,
So close your eyes once more and once more believe
That they all still believe in you.
Just one time.
But it never gets any more true,
So close your eyes once more and once more believe
That they all still believe in you.
Just one time.
Re: Best romanizations of Abjads & Abugidas?
Thanks! Do you know a good romanization system for Arabic that uses the vowels?sangi39 wrote:Every romanisation of abjads and abugidas I've ever seen more or less just treats them as if they were alphabets, i.e. consonants are written as if they were consonants and diacritics representing vowels are represented with full vowel letters. With abjads that don't write vowels, I've seen only the consonant represented so that, for example, the Arabic word for "subscription", when written مكتتب is romanised as <mkttb>, but romanised as <muktatib> when written مُكتَتِب. Taking an example from the abugida Ge'ez, አቡጊዳ is transliterated as <’äbugida> but not as <'bgd>, with the obligatory vowel marking on each base consonant being treated a if it were a vowel letter itself.
Re: Best romanizations of Abjads & Abugidas?
Why not look up the actual romanization?All4Ɇn wrote:Thanks! Do you know a good romanization system for Arabic that uses the vowels?sangi39 wrote:Every romanisation of abjads and abugidas I've ever seen more or less just treats them as if they were alphabets, i.e. consonants are written as if they were consonants and diacritics representing vowels are represented with full vowel letters. With abjads that don't write vowels, I've seen only the consonant represented so that, for example, the Arabic word for "subscription", when written مكتتب is romanised as <mkttb>, but romanised as <muktatib> when written مُكتَتِب. Taking an example from the abugida Ge'ez, አቡጊዳ is transliterated as <’äbugida> but not as <'bgd>, with the obligatory vowel marking on each base consonant being treated a if it were a vowel letter itself.
However, there are a few different ways to romanize it, personally I chose to romanize with consonants that have dots underthem.
Re: Best romanizations of Abjads & Abugidas?
Yeah, Wikipedia's chart compares 11 different ways of handling Arabic (with vowels) in the Latin alphabet. Wikipedia uses the ALA-LC method, and then the next one after that that I've seen used online is the Wehr method, which basically cut down on the use of Ch diacritics with the use of an underline.Ahzoh wrote:Why not look up the actual romanization?All4Ɇn wrote:Thanks! Do you know a good romanization system for Arabic that uses the vowels?sangi39 wrote:Every romanisation of abjads and abugidas I've ever seen more or less just treats them as if they were alphabets, i.e. consonants are written as if they were consonants and diacritics representing vowels are represented with full vowel letters. With abjads that don't write vowels, I've seen only the consonant represented so that, for example, the Arabic word for "subscription", when written مكتتب is romanised as <mkttb>, but romanised as <muktatib> when written مُكتَتِب. Taking an example from the abugida Ge'ez, አቡጊዳ is transliterated as <’äbugida> but not as <'bgd>, with the obligatory vowel marking on each base consonant being treated a if it were a vowel letter itself.
However, there are a few different ways to romanize it, personally I chose to romanize with consonants that have dots underthem.
You can tell the same lie a thousand times,
But it never gets any more true,
So close your eyes once more and once more believe
That they all still believe in you.
Just one time.
But it never gets any more true,
So close your eyes once more and once more believe
That they all still believe in you.
Just one time.
Re: Best romanizations of Abjads & Abugidas?
I've been looking at the different forms of Romanization for Arabic. There seems to be many inconstancies with alif and hamzah that aren't put into consideration. I'm trying to wrap my head around it but I'm not entirely getting it.sangi39 wrote:Yeah, Wikipedia's chart compares 11 different ways of handling Arabic (with vowels) in the Latin alphabet. Wikipedia uses the ALA-LC method, and then the next one after that that I've seen used online is the Wehr method, which basically cut down on the use of Ch diacritics with the use of an underline.Ahzoh wrote:Why not look up the actual romanization?All4Ɇn wrote:Thanks! Do you know a good romanization system for Arabic that uses the vowels?sangi39 wrote:Every romanisation of abjads and abugidas I've ever seen more or less just treats them as if they were alphabets, i.e. consonants are written as if they were consonants and diacritics representing vowels are represented with full vowel letters. With abjads that don't write vowels, I've seen only the consonant represented so that, for example, the Arabic word for "subscription", when written مكتتب is romanised as <mkttb>, but romanised as <muktatib> when written مُكتَتِب. Taking an example from the abugida Ge'ez, አቡጊዳ is transliterated as <’äbugida> but not as <'bgd>, with the obligatory vowel marking on each base consonant being treated a if it were a vowel letter itself.
However, there are a few different ways to romanize it, personally I chose to romanize with consonants that have dots underthem.
Re: Best romanizations of Abjads & Abugidas?
Which "inconsistencies" are you referring to, exactly?All4Ɇn wrote: I've been looking at the different forms of Romanization for Arabic. There seems to be many inconstancies with alif and hamzah that aren't put into consideration. I'm trying to wrap my head around it but I'm not entirely getting it.
You can tell the same lie a thousand times,
But it never gets any more true,
So close your eyes once more and once more believe
That they all still believe in you.
Just one time.
But it never gets any more true,
So close your eyes once more and once more believe
That they all still believe in you.
Just one time.
Re: Best romanizations of Abjads & Abugidas?
Sometimes Hamza functions as a separate letter, while most times it's a diacritic. Alif sometimes stand for long A, sometimes short A, sometimes a glottal stop with A.. etc.sangi39 wrote:Which "inconsistencies" are you referring to, exactly?All4Ɇn wrote: I've been looking at the different forms of Romanization for Arabic. There seems to be many inconstancies with alif and hamzah that aren't put into consideration. I'm trying to wrap my head around it but I'm not entirely getting it.