Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

--- transliterative_alphabet [2024/03/28 18:52] – [Usage Notes] ken
+++ transliterative_alphabet [Unknown date] (current) – external edit (Unknown date) 127.0.0.1
@@ Line 33: / Line 33: @@
 |ר‎	|r|	r|
 |ס‎	|c|	s|
-|שׁ‎	|s|	sh|
+|ש	|s|	sh|
-|ט‎	|f|	t|
+|[[ט‎]]	|f|	t|
 |ת‎	|t|	t|
 |צ‎	|x|	tz|
@@ Line 42: / Line 42: @@
 Most of the transliterated letters are pronounced intuitively for the English speaker, but a few minor caveats should be noted:
   * both כ‎ and ק‎ map to a "k" sound. The transliteration of כ‎ is 'k' and of ק‎ is 'q'
-  * both שׁ‎‎ and ס‎‎ map to a "s" sound, although sometimes שׁ‎ tends to shift toward "sh". The transliteration of שׁ‎‎ is 's' (based on phonetic /ʃ/) and of ס‎‎ is 'c'. (think of a soft c as in cycle or cent)
+  * both ש‎‎ and ס‎‎ map to a "s" sound, although sometimes ש‎ tends to shift toward "sh". The transliteration of ש‎‎ is 's' (based on phonetic /ʃ/) and of ס‎‎ is 'c'. (think of a soft c as in cycle or cent)
-  * both ת‎‎ and ט‎‎ map to a "t" sound. The transliteration of ת‎‎ is 't' and of ט‎‎ is 'f'. The letter f was chosen because it was unused, and vaguely resembles an upside down 't'. It should not me mistaken for פ‎ which sometimes is pronounced "f" in other Hebrew transliteration schemes.
+  * both ת‎‎ and [[ט‎‎]] map to a "t" sound. The transliteration of ת‎‎ is 't' and of ט‎‎ is 'f'. The letter f was chosen because it was unused, and vaguely resembles an upside down 't'. It should not me mistaken for פ‎ which sometimes is pronounced "f" in other Hebrew transliteration schemes.
   * the letter צ‎ is pronounced "tz". The chosen transliteration of צ‎ is 'x'
@@ Line 52: / Line 52: @@
 ====Usage Notes====
   *All consonants are followed by a vowel unless at the end of a sentence. The default vowel is "e" unless otherwise specified
-  *an ending ה‎ results in an "ah" sound. However, in order to satisfy the specifications that the transliterative alphabet be 1-to-1, we do not write the "a" as the presence of an "a" would imply a matching א in the Hebrew.
+  *the process for transliterating from Hebrew is as follows:
+    - ignore [[diacritics]] and [[affixes]]
+    - map all letters using the chart above
+    - add "e" after each consonant that is not already followed by another vowel, unless it is an "h" at the end of the word which essentially functions as a vowel.
+      * an ending ה‎ results in an "eh" sound, unless it is immediately preceded by a vowel, in which case it modifies the vowel's normal sound as in "ah", "ih", or "oh"
+    - map pronunciation from the transliteration as required for ק‎(q->k), ס(c->s), ש(s->sh), ט‎(f->t), צ(x->tz)
+  *any transliterated word can be mapped back to Hebrew by a two step process:
+    - ignore all "e"s
+    - map all other letters using the chart above
 ====Shortcomings and Problems====
 There are several known shortcomings inherent in this transliterative alphabet system.
-As with any linear algebra mapping, it is desirable for a system to be both one-to-one and onto. This sytem does nota appear to be so; at least we can easily prove that it does not entirely map onto the set of (Modern Hebrew + Ancient Hebrew).
+As with any linear algebra mapping, it is desirable for a transformation system to be both one-to-one and onto, that is to say that a mapping across the transform yields one and only one corresponding solution.
+In order for our transliteration system to meet these criteria it is necessary to officially exclude the vast numbers of alternate pronunciations and alternate spellings that exist in the current Hebrew environment (particularly but not limited to modern interpretations). We can easily prove that it does not entirely map onto the set of (Modern Hebrew + Ancient Hebrew), but the hope is that the criteria can be met for the limited subset of a more standardized spelling of the ancient Hebrew lexicon only. We will not be able to test this hypothesis until every word in the lexicon has been run through our transliteration algorithm.
 Certain scenarios exist where the possible pronunciations allowed within the system appear to fall short of actual pronunciations used in the verbal language. However, the intention of this mapping is to cover Ancient Hebrew only. We are not attempting to cover Modern Hebrew. Thus, it is important to differentiate between the Ancient and Modern versions; a task which is stymied by the fact that only the Modern pronunciations can truly be known. We are forced to perform some guesswork when it comes to the pronunciation of the Ancient Hebrew, based on the extant written evidence and informed (but not necessarily limited) by the Modern pronunciations, even though we know there to be significant differences.
-Ultimately though, the goal of this transliterative alphabet is not to provide [[consistent pronunciation]] but rather, to provide a tool capable of aiding in the discovery of [[semantic consistency]] within the Ancient corpus.
+Ultimately though, the goal of this transliterative alphabet is not to provide consistent [[pronunciation]] but rather, to provide a tool capable of aiding in the discovery of [[semantic consistency]] within the Ancient corpus.
 Since the discussion has necessarily turned to linear algebra, it should be stated also that shortcomings are not one-to-one and onto with problems. That is to say, that  the admitted shortcomings reveal only //potential// problems. They may or may not materialize into actual problems, dependent upon how they affect our ability to achieve our goal of [[semantic consistency]]. Each case must be evaluated by its specific impact. So what are the possibly problematic cases?
   * leading and trailing [[a vs e]] are indistinguishable
-  * the "J" sound appears to be represented in the verbal but not the written language
+  * the "J" sound appears to be represented in the verbal but not the written language. This is explored further under the heading: [[#The Judah Problem]]
-    * the "Judah" problem
+  * the "V" sound appears to be represented in the verbal language but is inadequately represented in the written language. This is explored further under the heading: [[#The Levi Problem]].
-  * the "V" sound appears to be represented in the verbal language but is inadequately represented in the written language
-    * the "Levi" problem
 Other strange cases:
-  * the "Sabbath" problems(s)
+  * [[#the "Sabbath" problem]](s)
   * a few other weird pronunciation topics
@@ Line 79: / Line 86: @@
 ===the Judah problem===
-The word "Judah" is exemplary of a number of issues. In Hebrew, it is spelled יהודה. We transliterate this into 'ihodah'. Exactly how the "ih" pattern becomes a "j" sound is unclear. We do not know if the "j" sound was present in the ancient oral language, or if it developed later.
+The word "Judah" is exemplary of a number of issues. In Hebrew, it is spelled יהודה. We transliterate this into '[[ihodeh]]'. Exactly how the "ih" pattern becomes a "j" sound is unclear. We do not know if the "j" sound was present in the ancient oral language, or if it developed later.
+Other words (for example 'gihon') use the same "ih" letter pattern and do not imply a "j" sound.
-Furthermore, we do not know how the "o" turned into a long "u" sound. It should be noted that even in English an o often takes on this sound, although we are accustomed to double the letter visually to form "oo".
+A secondary problem exists in the word "Judah". How the "o" turned into a long "u" sound. It should be noted that even in English an o often takes on this sound, although we are accustomed to double the letter visually to form "oo".
-Other words (for example 'gihon') use the same "ih" letter pattern and do not imply a "j" sound.
   *the "j" sound appears to be represented in the verbal language but is inadequately represented in the written language. Did this sound exist in the ancient language?
@@ Line 90: / Line 96: @@
 The word לוי transliterates to 'loi'.
-At first glance this may appear to be an example of a rather common occurrence of the Hebrew letter ו seeming to perform multiple duties. It happens quite regulary that the ו, though generally sounding like "o", will often take on a trailing consonant sound and become "ov". That may explain the presence of the "v" sound. But does it? If this were the case, we would have "lovi", not "levi". The usual pronunciation of "levi" emphasises the long e sound, which we would normally spell using "ee". However, this is an additional problem. The Hebrew alphabet does not include such a sound. The closest we get would be a short 'i' which is represented by י. But in this particular word, that letter appears only at the end, and is supposedly pronounced as a long i, something fairly atypical for the letter י.
+At first glance this may appear to be an example of a rather common occurrence of the Hebrew letter ו seeming to perform multiple duties. It happens quite regulary that the ו, though generally sounding like "o", will often take on a trailing consonant sound and become "ov". That may explain the presence of the "v" sound. But does it? If this were the case, we would have "lovi", not "levi".
+Strangely, a "v" sound often occurs in common Hebrew pronunciations, where we should expect a "b". That is to say, the letter ב is usually understood to correspond to "b", but sometimes it is a "v" instead. This is generally explained away with the argument that the diacritic dot in the middle of בּ turns a "b" into a "v". A valiant effort by it's proponents, but we have already addressed how trustworthy [[diacritics]] are.
+The usual pronunciation of "levi" emphasises the long e sound, which we would normally spell using "ee". However, this is an additional problem. The Hebrew alphabet does not include such a sound. The closest we get would be a short 'i' which is represented by י. But in this particular word, that letter appears only at the end, and is supposedly pronounced as a long i, something fairly atypical for the letter י.
   *the "v" sound appears to be represented in the verbal language but is inadequately represented in the written language. Did this sound exist in the ancient language?
@@ Line 101: / Line 111: @@
 o oo/u v
+sample data:
+  * 2341 hoileh - havilah
+then theres the other side of the coin - non O pronounces as O
+  * find an example with y - o
+  * a - o
+  * null as o - see occasional alternate spellings of [[gebor]], and [[neheset]]
 ===the Sabbath problems===
@@ Line 121: / Line 137: @@
 FIXME
+===Sometimes Y===
+Consider the word גלעד. It is pronounced "Gilead", and this pronunciation is very closely aligned with the transliteration of '[[geleyed]]'. In this case it is clear that the letter ע is functioning as a consonant, as in the English word 'yes', rather than a vowel, and that the vowel sounds are supplied by the "invisible E". Although there are probably other examples where ע may have been intended to act more like a vowel, it is impossible to know for sure, and our approach is to treat the letter ע consistently.
+As another example, consider another well known word, בעל, which is typically rendered "Baal" and pronounced with a hard A very similar to "bail" or "bale". We see that English has two different words with different spellings that match up to this pronunciation. Other possible spelling are possible as well, such as "bayel" or even "beyel". It is the latter which matches our chosen orthography, and in fact is the exact transliteration our algorithms output for בעל - [[beyel]].
+===Ghost Vowels===
+example [[pix]], [[gedol]]