Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from November 2003
> We cannot leave "transliterate" as such because it's a piece of UNIX
> jargon and not plain English. (for example).
Transliteration is hardly the same as translation, and this distinction is
wholly unrelated to collective Unix culture. The first is but a simple
rewrite from one character set into another; the second goes substantially
beyond that, substituting instead a term from the target language whose
*meaning* corresponds to the one used in the first language.
By way of illustration:
Greek word θεοκτονία τετραγλωττος πρεσβύτεροi μαργαρῐτις
Latin transliteration theoktonia tetraglottos presbyteroi margarītis
Latin translation deicīdium quadrilinguis seniores nacrum (MedL)
English translation god-killing four-tongued elders pearl
(Just as the Romans would further Latinize transliterated Greek words into
forms that better fit into their language (eg, k to c, -os to -us, -oi
to -i), we do the same in English; sometimes we even have Anglicized
versions of both the Greek and the Latin, such as theoktony coexisting
with deicide, tetraglot with quadrilingual.)
According to The Dictionary, transliteration is a transitive verb defined as:
To replace (letters or characters of one language) by those of
another used to represent the same sounds; to write (a word, etc.)
in the characters of another alphabet. Hence transˈliterated ppl. a.
On the other hand, the relevant definition for translation (def II 2 a) defines
it as a transitive verb meaning:
To turn from one language into another; ‘to change into another language
retaining the sense’ (J.); to render; also, to express in other words,
to paraphrase. (The chief current sense.)
In summary, because to translate is to paraphrase, and because the tr///
operator does no such thing, transliterate is the correct term to describe
its operation of mere character-set (that is, alphabet) transcription.
Or did you want it to be "transcription"? :-)
--tom
Thread Next