As an anonymous user, you can only add new data. If you would like to also modify existing data, please create an account and indicate your languages on your user page.

User talk:JimDeLaHunt

From OmegaWiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Welcome[edit]

Hi,
Welcome to OmegaWiki ! I hope you have fun on our project :) Please create yourself some Babel templates and please read about the DefinedMeaning. When you have questions, please ask consider using the IRC channel. :) GerardM 02:56, 9 June 2007 (EDT)

Understanding OmegaWiki[edit]

Here are some notes to help me understand OmegaWiki. Right now I'm finding the concepts a bit unclear.

Study links: DefinedMeaning, Expression (Spelling), Language & Script, FAQ

Questions and concerns:

  • Being clearer about Language. OW is based on ISO-639-3 which is based on Ethnologue, and that isn't clear about distinction between spoken and written languages; they seem to say that all spoken and written manifestations of a language are given the same language tag. OmegaWiki appears to be about written languages.
    • That is kinda obvious at this stage. We do however want to support sign languages (using the SignWriting script) —This unsigned comment was added by GerardM (talkcontribs) 23 June 2007 13:28.
    • How are regional variants like English (UK) and English (USA) denoted?
      • They are indicated as options. We do this for some languages and on request. —This unsigned comment was added by GerardM (talkcontribs) 23 June 2007 13:28.
    • Gerard! Thank you for responding. So... I think that the description on the Language page is not clear enough yet. Let's take this conversation to that article. Everyone will be able to learn from it there. JimDeLaHunt 16:30, 24 June 2007 (EDT)
  • Readings in Japanese, Chinese. It is not possible in general to derive pronunciation of an Expression of Han characters in a given language. Japanese database frequently carry a separate "reading" field to give pronunciation of, e.g., personal names.
    • It makes more sense to have IPA. When done properly it works for everyone. We do IPA. —This unsigned comment was added by GerardM (talkcontribs) 23 June 2007 13:28.
      • A dictionary of the Japanese language written in Japanese needs to have readings in kana in addition to expressions in kanji. The claim that "it works for everyone" implies that it is possible to automatically convert from IPA to kana. That claim surprises me, given what I know about IPA and kana orthography. Where is a good place to conduct this discussion? On Functionality wanted ..? In an article on Reading? We should put this conversation in a place where everyone can learn from it. JimDeLaHunt 16:30, 24 June 2007 (EDT)
        • I do not say that you can convert from IP to Kana. I do say that to people who do not know Japanese, Kana does not help at all and neither does transliteration. GerardM 18:03, 24 June 2007 (EDT)
          • You have just baffled me. I say I want to study Readings, because I believe it's essential for OmegaWiki to represent them. You reply that "It makes more sense to have IPA", i.e. it is not necessary to represent Readings. You say, IPA "works for everyone". I reply that IPA isn't sufficient for a dictionary of the Japanese language written in Japanese. You reply about people who do not know Japanese. How did we switch from the dictionary needs of native speakers to the needs of non-speakers? And how does that relate to your reply about "Japanese English is not the object"? JimDeLaHunt 18:59, 24 June 2007 (EDT)
            • At this stage the only two places where we do something language specific is on connecting Expressions to a Language and by only allowing for specified parts of speech for a language. IPA is something that fits within the current limitations. For a "reading" to function we need to connect two SynTrans records both Japanese together. We do not have that. Also, for readings to be understood, you have to know enough Japanese. Properly transcribed pronunications in IPA work for everyone.. To get this functionality, we need someone to write software. As there is more basic functionality lacking, at this stage it will be someone willing to scratch his own itch. This does not means that we will not provide to a developer on the architecture.. GerardM 01:29, 25 June 2007 (EDT)
    • Ah! So did you mean by your 23 June 2007 13:28 comment above, that "At present, the functionality of OmegaWiki allows recording IPA and doesn't allow recording readings properly. Properly transcribed IPA is equally useful to readers from any language background. Thus it made more sense to implement IPA support first." In other words, it was a rationale for the choice to implement IPA so far and Readings not yet; it was not a statement that Readings are unnecessary to support long-term, right? If I'm understanding you right, I agree with that rationale. JimDeLaHunt 02:58, 25 June 2007 (EDT)
      • We include IPa support. We cannot technically' support readings at this time. GerardM 05:04, 25 June 2007 (EDT)
    • A guide to intonation would be nice in Japanese at least, to differentiate Expression:橋 (は「し」 bridge), Expression:箸 (は」し chopsticks), and Expression:端 (は「し end, extremity). Kenkyusha's New Pocket Japanese-English Dictionary, Revised Edition, Matsuda K., ed., 25th printing, 1986 is a good example of intonation marks for Japanese.
    • Readings are different from transliterations. Or perhaps, a reading of a Japanese Kanji phrase is a transliteration of the kanji to kana. Transliteration of the kana to other scripts, e.g. Latin script via Hepburn romanisation, can then be automated.
    • Automatic transliteration from one script to another, where that is practical, would be nice to have.
      • We do not do transliteration at this stage. What is the point ? For whom do you do it ? —This unsigned comment was added by GerardM (talkcontribs) 23 June 2007 13:28.
        • Is it a goal of OmegaWiki that eventually it contain enough data to generate an Japanese-English dictionary? In that case, it needs to have Latin script renderings of the Japanese words. These could be produced by automatic transliteration from kana readings to a Romanisation like Hepburn. Thus, automated transliteration is used for any bilingual dictionary between a language in one script, which requires readings, and a different script. JimDeLaHunt 16:30, 24 June 2007 (EDT)
          • Japanese English is not the object.. Japanese everything is as relevant. A transcription that only helps Americans or English speaking people is not necessarily our objective. When you want romanisation, there is Romanji. Romanji is for the Japanese by the Japanese and as such a more valid approach. GerardM 18:03, 24 June 2007 (EDT)
            • I'm baffled again. When you say, "Japanese English is not the object", do you mean to say that it is not a goal of OmegaWiki to meet the requirements of people translating between Japanese and English? And I don't understand what you mean by "When you want romanisation, there is Romanji." Romaji (no n) is a Japanese word for any Japanese text in latin script, or for latin script itself. Romanised Japanese is romaji. The word "Toyota" on the side of car in Tokyo is "romaji". I don't follow what you are trying to say. JimDeLaHunt 18:59, 24 June 2007 (EDT)
              • It is not the goal to meet the requirements of people translating from Japanese to English when this excludes the requirements of people who are interested to translate from Japanese to another language. The point of Romaji is that it is a transcription to the Latin script for the Japanese and not for people who speak another language. GerardM 01:29, 25 June 2007 (EDT)
          • Ah! So did you mean by your 18:03, 24 June 2007 (EDT) comment above, that "the Japanese-English language pair is not a privileged goal, we want to support Japanese-anything, or rather any language pair. A transliteration which only helps Americans or English speaking people is not sufficient. If I have to pick a single romanisation, I pick the romanisation used by the Japanese as the most valid choice." JimDeLaHunt 02:58, 25 June 2007 (EDT)
            • In which case I reply, I agree with the goal of supporting any language pairs. But I think "Romaji" or a romanisation defined by Japanese people won't get you there. First, Japanese native speakers use multiple romanisations. Consider the name 松田(まつだ), which is normally romanised as "matsuda" in writing, "matuda" in text input, but "mazda" in overseas car sales. The phonetic rendering which is most standard is kana. Second, I think OmegaWiki should be set up to provide multiple transliterations, depending on the source script, the destination script, and user preference. Consider Japanese to Arabic, or Hebrew to Traditional Chinese. A transcription in roman script would be helpful, but not the best for these examples. Far better would be a transliteration from kana to Arabic, and from IPA to Traditional Chinese. Fortunately I'll bet it's possible to generate the transliteration automatically in both cases. Manual overrides would be needed in some cases, so it would be nice if the model could store these, marked by language or script pairs. JimDeLaHunt 02:58, 25 June 2007 (EDT)
              • I am not a fan of transliteration and transcription.. Njoe Jork anyone ? The minimal requirement to use OmegaWiki is to know the words. When we get software that makes use of our data for educational purposes, fine. That is not here and now. —This unsigned comment was added by GerardM (talkcontribs) 05:04, 25 June 2007 (EDT).
  • Language, Expression, and DefinedMeaning: Where is Language indicated in an Expression-DefinedMeaning combination? If it's a trait of the Expression, then there should be different Expression entities for French "fin" and English "fin". If it's a trait of the DefinedMeaning, then there's just one Expression.
    • There is sufficient documentation to cover this.. It is (obviously) on the Expression level. —This unsigned comment was added by GerardM (talkcontribs) 23 June 2007 13:28.
      • Maybe I'm just thick, but the documentation isn't sufficient to make OmegaWiki's intention clear to me. I'm happy to continue this conversation on the Expression article. JimDeLaHunt 16:30, 24 June 2007 (EDT)
  • Citations. The Oxford English Dictionary cites usages of the words it defines. Does OmegaWiki have a way to accept that kind of data?
    • We do have "sample sentences". —This unsigned comment was added by GerardM (talkcontribs) 23 June 2007 13:28.
      • Where is the "sample sentences" functionality described? I couldn't find it in a search for the phrase "sample sentences"? JimDeLaHunt 16:30, 24 June 2007 (EDT)
        • As a matter a fact there may be no documentation for it. I did however blog about it. —This unsigned comment was added by GerardM (talkcontribs) 18:03, 24 June 2007 (EDT).
  • How does GerardM do it? Not only does he put in a lot of work to develop OmegaWiki, and contribute to discussions in the International Beer Parlour and on the articles, but he also takes the time to contribute to a newbie editor's musings on my own Talk page. Such service! How generous! How does he do it? Thank you. JimDeLaHunt 16:30, 24 June 2007 (EDT)
    • Well it is a job and someone has to do it.. PS I eat spaghetti .. it is cheap. :) GerardM 18:03, 24 June 2007 (EDT)

Japanese readings[edit]

Hi Jim,

I don't know if you've read http://omegawiki.blogspot.com/2010/01/language-specific-annotations.html , where I announced that I introduced the possibility to add "revised Hepburn romanization" and hiragana and katakana transcriptions of kanji words for Japanese.

I think it is possible to have readings as well, but I would need that you tell me which readings you'd need, and if it would work the same as the above mentioned annotations. Thanks --Kip 09:38, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

No, I hadn't seen that blog post. Thank you for pointing it out to me. My reply in Meta:International Beer Parlour#Readings. — JimDeLaHunt 21:39, 17 February 2011 (UTC)