3 ms·
Sign of the worldwide dominance of English, sadly. Hepburn is utter nonsense if your native language is e.g. German or Irish - but it's popular with English mon
by lmm 3y ago
Sign of the worldwide dominance of English, sadly. Hepburn is utter nonsense if your native language is e.g. German or Irish - but it's popular with English monoglots who believe that their peculiar use of the Latin alphabet is somehow objectively correct, and they seem to be in ascendence these days.
- zaik 3y agoMy native language is German and Hepburn is much closer to the correct pronunciation than Kunreishiki.
- downvotetruth 3y agoThe Latin alphabet does not include J, U, and W, but the English alphabet does (see "Shinjuku") and this would likely be better understood as a form of Japanese spelling reform rather than "Romanization".
- lmm 3y ago> The Latin alphabet does not include J, U, and W, but the English alphabet does (see "Shinjuku") Japanese does not naturally include distinct U/V letters and does not have a first-class concept that needs to be written with a J; the official way to romanize that place name is "Sinzyuku" and that's morally equivalent to a traditional-Latin "SINZYVKV". W does exist but is decidedly second-class and declining (only the "Wa" sound is really heard any more; I suspect it will go the way of obsolete phonemes like "Ye" and "We" soon enough). > this would likely be better understood as a form of Japanese spelling reform rather than "Romanization". It makes no sense as a way of spelling Japanese. It's about standardising on anglicising Japanese instead of romanising it.
- samus 3y agoHepburn is not equal to the English spelling rules though, which are rife with inconsistencies and exceptions. Even though it doesn't match with how many language's version of the Latin alphabet works, and one might object to that, Hepburn an effective tool to get the job done. English learners wish that the rules of English orthography were that consistent! If one's goal is to travel to Japan or to research their culture, knowledge of Japanese and/or English is required anyways. In the latter case, one will be positively surprised that there are only a few rules specific to Japanese to be learned to be able to read with some degree of accuracy. One might object to the dominance of English as a lingua franca, but actually any other languages being the lingua franca would dominate the Romanization system as well, and that would lead to similar issues for speakers whose writing system works differently.
- lmm 3y ago> One might object to the dominance of English as a lingua franca, but actually any other languages being the lingua franca would dominate the Romanization system as well Kunreisiki is not a system dominated by any particular lingua franca; it's a system that directly reflects Japanese ways of writing Japanese. One could imagine e.g. a Spanish-influenced romanization system that would represent the は-line in a way that corresponded to Spanish orthography becoming popular in a world that was dominated by Spanish as a lingua franca, and that would have the same problems that Hepburn does. But Kunreisiki really is "neutral" in that sense.
- samus 3y agoIn short, it seems to make the Latin alphabet work for Japanese. Perfectly fine if Japan uses it as its Latin-based writing system (discarding the native ones), or to transcribe it for academic usage, but unhelpful as a Romanization, which is mostly intended to make it easier for people completely unfamiliar with the language to pronounce names and to learn the language.
- brazzy 3y agoMy native language is German, and you're wrong. Hepburn may not be an ideal match for German, but it's still a better one than Kunrei-shiki. I'm fairly sure there is no language in the world whose pronunciation of Latin letters matches the latter (hah!). The only thing Kunrei-shiki has going for it is that it's more regular and can be more easily matched to kana. It's easier for Japanese kids to learn. But they are not the ones who are going to use it primarily. You could use different romanization systems for each foreign language, and there are some (there is one for German where あいち is "Aitschi"), but that doesn't end up serving anyone well in a globalized world with an Internet.
- anigbrowl 3y agoMy native language is Irish and I disagree. If you think English pronunciation rules are odd or inconsistent, then Irish will make you cry out in pain, as dialects from less than a hundred miles away can sound wildly different. I don't use Romaji much but I learned the Japanese syllabary ~35 years ago so translating Hepburn to correct pronunciation doesn't involve any conscious thought on my part.
- lmm 3y ago> My native language is Irish and I disagree. If you think English pronunciation rules are odd or inconsistent, then Irish will make you cry out in pain, as dialects from less than a hundred miles away can sound wildly different. Irish pronunciation may be local, but the orthography is very consistent. I actually felt there was a lot in common between Kunreisiki and Irish - at first blush it's very confusing for a native English speaker, but once you get over that initial reflex and read it according to its own rules it all makes sense. > I don't use Romaji much but I learned the Japanese syllabary ~35 years ago so translating Hepburn to correct pronunciation doesn't involve any conscious thought on my part. Right, but doing that will paper over the issues with any romanisation system. What do you find worse about Kunreisiki?
- anigbrowl 3y agoI don't have a strong opinion on Kunreisiki; when I first came across it I thought 'this looks needlessly complicated' and just assumed it was old and outmoded so basically I've always ignored it. My first introduction to Japanese was from a friend who taught me the pronunciation and hiragana at the same time, so I got used to the sounds well before encountering Romaji. I only learned about the history of Romanization and took a more rigorous interest in the language years later.