lotwell wrote:Yes I understand. And indeed I am learning classical Tibetan. However, it is a process. In the meantime I would like to pronounced practice texts with some approximation.
What is the ö supposed to represent? Is it a certain tone?
Thanks : ) Deep bows,
Lotwell
gad rgyangs wrote:everybody and their mother have their own phonetic transliteration system, none of which are very good. easier to just learn how to pronounce tibetan.
dharmagoat wrote:gad rgyangs wrote:everybody and their mother have their own phonetic transliteration system, none of which are very good. easier to just learn how to pronounce tibetan.
I agree. But some are better than others.
The THL Simplified Phonetic Transcription of Standard Tibetan is an attempt to standardise a phonetically-based romanised writing system for Tibetan.
gad rgyangs wrote:yes, I learned that one when I studied with Nicolas Tournadre at UVa one summer, but even then we didn't really use it at all: we learned to pronounce Tibetan correctly from day one., learning the traditional spelling da-ra-ta-tra-kigu-tri (see you cant even really put that phonetically correctly into latin spelling)... etc. Sure, its probably the best phonetic system (he is a linguistics scholar who specializes in Tibetic languages), but how many dharma texts have you seen that use it? 0?
dharmagoat wrote:gad rgyangs wrote:yes, I learned that one when I studied with Nicolas Tournadre at UVa one summer, but even then we didn't really use it at all: we learned to pronounce Tibetan correctly from day one., learning the traditional spelling da-ra-ta-tra-kigu-tri (see you cant even really put that phonetically correctly into latin spelling)... etc. Sure, its probably the best phonetic system (he is a linguistics scholar who specializes in Tibetic languages), but how many dharma texts have you seen that use it? 0?
I agree that taking the time to learn the correct pronunciation of Tibetan is the key. The problem is that those who have both the time and inclination to do this are relatively few. Also there is the problem of writing Tibetan in the Tibetan script. Even with the (now) widespread adoption of Unicode, for most of us writing in the Tibetan script is not as straightforward as writing in our own native roman script, nor is it as accessible. We need a standardised system for writing Tibetan, even if it provides only an approximation to the correct pronunciation. Often it takes time for a standard to become established. Unicode is a good example of this.
gad rgyangs wrote:if you cant understand the tibetan you should probably just use english (or whatever ones native language is) except for the mantras. after all, the tibetans themselves translated everything into their own language, just keeping the mantras in sanskrit.
dharmagoat wrote:gad rgyangs wrote:if you cant understand the tibetan you should probably just use english (or whatever ones native language is) except for the mantras. after all, the tibetans themselves translated everything into their own language, just keeping the mantras in sanskrit.
I don't agree. And what about proper nouns, like place names and people's names? These can't be translated.
gad rgyangs wrote:wtf? vajrayogini= dorjenaljorma, hevajra=kyedorje ive seen english translations of names too like "diamond sow" for vajravarahi
dharmagoat wrote:gad rgyangs wrote:wtf? vajrayogini= dorjenaljorma, hevajra=kyedorje ive seen english translations of names too like "diamond sow" for vajravarahi
How would you translate "ཆོས་རྒྱལ་ནམ་མཁའི་ནོར་བུ་" (chos rgyal nam mkha'i nor bu)?
gad rgyangs wrote:dharmagoat wrote:gad rgyangs wrote:wtf? vajrayogini= dorjenaljorma, hevajra=kyedorje ive seen english translations of names too like "diamond sow" for vajravarahi
How would you translate "ཆོས་རྒྱལ་ནམ་མཁའི་ནོར་བུ་" (chos rgyal nam mkha'i nor bu)?
Dharma King Sky Jewel
but why would you want to translate his name?
dharmagoat wrote:gad rgyangs wrote:
Dharma King Sky Jewel
but why would you want to translate his name?
My point exactly.
dharmagoat wrote:What about proper nouns, like place names and people's names? These can't be translated.
dharmagoat wrote:dharmagoat wrote:What about proper nouns, like place names and people's names? These can't be translated.
I can see how the misunderstanding came about. It would have been clearer if I had said "These are better not translated".
gad rgyangs wrote:so you think the tibetans were wrong to translate the sanskrit names into tibetan?
dharmagoat wrote:gad rgyangs wrote:so you think the tibetans were wrong to translate the sanskrit names into tibetan?
I have been talking only about the translation of Tibetan into other languages. I advocate transcription rather than translation, and support the standardisation of a phonetically-based transcription system for writing Tibetan.
THL Simplified Phonetic Transcription of Standard Tibetan
dharmagoat wrote:I agree that taking the time to learn the correct pronunciation of Tibetan is the key. The problem is that those who have both the time and inclination to do this are relatively few. Also there is the problem of writing Tibetan in the Tibetan script. Even with the (now) widespread adoption of Unicode, for most of us writing in the Tibetan script is not as straightforward as writing in our own native roman script, nor is it as accessible. We need a standardised system for writing Tibetan, even if it provides only an approximation to the correct pronunciation. Often it takes time for a standard to become established. Unicode is a good example of this.
Users browsing this forum: Majestic-12 [Bot] and 3 guests