The amplification of the rules is given below:
Letters.│Pronunciation and remarks. Examples.
────────+───────────────────────────────────────+──────────────
a │_ah_, _a_ as in _father_ │Java, Banána.
│ │
e │_eh_, _e_ as in _benefit_ │Tel-el-Kebír, Oléleh,
│ │ Yezo, Medina, Levúka,
│ │ Peru.
│ │
i │English _e_; _i_ as in _ravine_; │
│ the sound of _ee_ in _beet_. │
│Thus not _Feejee_, but │Fiji, Hindi.
│ │
o │_o_ as in _mote_ │Tokio.
│ │
u │long _u_, as in _flute_; the │
│ sound of _oo_ in _boot_. │
│Thus, not _Zooloo_, but │Zulu, Sumatra.
│ │
│All vowels are shortened │Yarra, Tanna,
│ in sound by doubling │ Mecca, Jidda,
│ the following consonant. │ Bonny.
│ │
│Doubling of a vowel is │Nuulúa, Oosima.
│ only necessary where │
│ there is a distinct repetition │
│ of the single sound. │
│ │
ai │English _i_ as in _ice_ │Shanghai.
│ │
au │_ow_ as in _how_. │
│ Thus not _foochow_, but │Fuchau.
│ │
ao │is slightly different from │Macao.
│ above. │
│ │
ei │is the sound of the two │Beirút, Beilúl.
│ Italian vowels, but is │
│ frequently slurred │
│ over, when it is scarcely │
│ to be distinguished │
│ from _ey_ in the English │
│ _they_. │
│ │
b │English _b_. │
│ │
c │is always soft, but is so │Celebes.
│ nearly the sound of _s_ │
│ that it should be seldom │
│ used. (If _Celebes_ │
│ were not already recognized │
│ it would be written _Selebes_.) │
│ │
ch │is always soft as in │Chingchin.
│ _church_. │
│ │
d │English _d_. │
│ │
f │English _f_. _ph_ should not be used │
│ for the sound of _f_. │
│ Thus, not _Haiphong_ but │Haifong, Nafa.
│ │
g │is always hard. (Soft _g_ │Galápagos.
│ is given by _j_.) │
│ │
h │is always pronounced when inserted. │
│ │
j │English _j_. _Dj_ should never be put │Japan, Jinchuen.
│ for this sound. │
│ │
k │English _k_. It should always be put │
│ for the hard _c_. │
│ Thus, not _Corea_, but │Korea
│ │
kh │ the Oriental guttural │Khan.
│ │
gh │is another guttural, as in the Turkish.│ Dagh, Ghazi.
│ │
l,m,n │as in English. │
│ │
ng │has two separate sounds, the │
│ one hard as in the English word │
│ _finger_, the other as in _singer_. │
│ As these two sounds are rarely │
│ employed in the same locality, no │
│ attempt is made to distinguish │
│ between them. │
│ │
p │ as in English. │
│ │
q │should never be employed; _qu_ is │
│ given as _kw_. │ Kwangtung.
│ │
r,s,t,v │as in English │ Sawákin.
│ │
w,x,y │as in English │ Sawákin.
│ │
y │is always a consonant, as in _yard_, │
│ and therefore should never be used │
│ as a terminal, _i_ or _e_ being │
│ substituted. │
│ Thus, not _Mikindány_ but │ Mikíndáni.
│ not _Kwaly_, but │ Kwale.
│ │
z │ English _z_ │ Zulu.
│ │
│Accents should not generally be │Tongatábu, Galápagos,
│ used, but when there is a very │ Paláwan, Saráwak.
│ decided emphatic syllable or stress, │
│ which affects the sound of the word, │
│ it should be marked by an _acute_ │
│ accent. │
│ │
────────+───────────────────────────────────────+──────────────
A few points need to be emphasized. Of course the consonantal sound in
_itch_ should never be expressed in transliteration by the Polish _cz_,
nor by the German _tsch_. _Tch_ has been much used for this sound; but
the _t_ is hardly necessary if, as the Geographical Society recommend,
_ch_ is always used with this sound only and never with the sound _sh_.
Of course there is no reason why _ch_ should be used in foreign names
with the sound _sh_ any more than _j_ with the sound _zh_. All that
was needed to prevent ambiguity was for some competent authority to
make a rule; and these rules of the Geographical Society will no doubt
soon be copied into all manuals and followed by the majority. In this
connection we express our regret that a new edition of Dr. Thomas’s
excellent Dictionary of Biography continues to give his support to what
we believe is an obsolescent system of transliteration.
Nor should the consonantal sound in _judge_ be rendered by the English
_dg_, nor the French _dj_, nor the German _dsch_, but by _j_ alone.
Likewise the consonantal sound in _she_ is not to be written after the
French style, _ch_, or as the Germans do, _sch_. The sound which the
French transliterate by _j_ we must express by _zh_ (_e.g._, Nizhni
Novgorod). _Tz_ is best to use in Semitic and Slavic names, and _ts_
in Japanese and Chinese. For the Semitic “yod” _y_ is the proper
equivalent, and not the German _j_. But after a consonant in the same
syllable it is usual to change the _y_ to _i_ (Biela not Byela), and in
Russian names _ai_, _ei_, _oi_, _ui_ are used instead of _ay_, _ey_,
_oy_, _uy_ (Alexei not Alexey). After _i_ the _y_ is dropped (Dobni not
Dobniy). _W_ is to be used rather than _i_ in Arabic names (_e. g._,
Moawiyah). But the Russian, Serb, Bulgarian, and Wallach contain no
such sound or letter as _w_, and we must write Paskevitch, Vasili, not
as do the Germans, Paskewitch, Wasili. In the last syllable of names of
places (Azov, Kiev) _ev_ and _ov_ are to be used, because the Russians
used the corresponding letter, though they pronounce _ef_ and _of_
(in the nominative cases). But in the last syllable of family names,
similarly pronounced, _of_ and _ef_ may be used, because the Russians
sign their names _off_ and _eff_ when using Roman characters. The last
_f_, which they use, may be omitted as being plainly not required to
express the sound, and not corresponding to the Russian character.
_Kh_ represents the full guttural, which the Germans make _ch_ and the
Spanish _j_ in Slavic and Oriental names. _H_ answers to the softer
guttural as well as to the Hebrew _he_. _K_ answers to the Semitic
_Kaph_ and _Koph_.
The use of _ei_ for the sound of _a_ in fate, _ea_ in great, _ai_ in
trait, is not altogether satisfactory. It is not easy to see why _e_
was not used to represent this sound, and {111} the short _e_, like
the short _a_, _i_, _o_, and _u_, indicated by doubling the following
consonant, as Yeddo, Meddina.
The general rule, then, is to use the consonants with their English
value, the vowels with their continental, or, to speak more exactly,
their German and Italian value, for the French value of _u_ should
never be used, and the short French _a_ requires of us a doubled
consonant after it. Their _ou_ and our _oo_ is quite unnecessary to
express the sound of the last syllable of Timbuctu or Khartum.
C: A. CUTTER.
C. B. TILLINGHAST.
W: C. LANE.
MICHAEL HEILPRIN.
Professor Toy, of Harvard University, furnished to the committee a
transliteration table for Semitic languages, Professor Lanman, of the
same University, one for Sanskrit, and Mr. Heilprin, of the committee,
one for Russian.
Professor LANMAN remarked on his table:
1. It will be observed that each of the five rows numbered 1 to 5
consists of five letters; the second and fourth in each, _i. e._, the
aspirates, are often written, especially in older works, thus, _k῾_,
_g῾_, _c῾_, _j῾_, _ṭ῾_, _ḍ῾_, _t῾_, _d῾_, _p῾_, _b῾_; that is, the
rough breathing takes the place of the _h_.
2. Write long vowels with a macron, thus, _ā_, _ī_, _ū_, _r̄_, and not
with a circumflex.
3. Wherever you find the combination _ṛi_, with a dot under the _ṛ_,
reduce it to simple _ṛ_, since it is a simple unitary sound.
4. The palatals (row 2) are often written by means of the gutturals and
an accent:
thus, we find _k´_ _k´h_ _g´_ _g´h_;
for _c_ _ch_ _j_ _jh_
and in some German books _c_ (which has the sound of _ch_ in _church_)
is written _tsch_, and _j_ (= _j_ in _judge_) in like manner _dsch_.
Further, _c_ and _ch_ are written in some English works as _ch_ and
_cch_, a useless waste of labor.
5. When the third palatal is written by _ǵ_, it is common among the
Germans to write the first semi-vowel by _j_. The last semi-vowel is
often written _w_ (instead of _v_).
6. The transliteration of the _first two sibilants_ is very
fluctuating. My _ç_, is written _ś_ by Monier Williams in his
dictionary.
The second sibilant is often written _sh_, sometimes _š_, by me as _ṣ_,
like the other linguals.
7. Finally an _s_ at the end of a Sanskrit word is converted into
an aspiration called _risarga_, and written thus «:», and in
transliteration is written in this manner, _ḥ_. The nasality of a vowel
is marked by _ṅ_ or _ṁ_ which appears in the Sanskrit as a dot above
the body of the consonant.
For a brief and lucid discussion of these matters and a defense of the
system of Professor Whitney, of Yale, which is followed in his grammar
and in Lanman’s Reader, see The Proceedings of the American Oriental
Society, October, 1880, p. xvii.
{112}
[Illustration: Sanskrit Transliteration Report.]
{113}
[Illustration: Semitic Transliteration.]
{114}
[Illustration: Russian Transliteration.]
{115}