No subject

sed on Mandarin than on other dialects=2C but that there is no one-to-one c=
orrespondance the way there would be with a Romanized alphabet.<BR>
&nbsp=3B<BR>
(I'll look sometime myself for more references=3B not right now).<BR>
&nbsp=3B<BR>
Thanks.&nbsp=3B Best wishes=2C<BR>
&nbsp=3B<BR>
&nbsp=3B<BR>
--C. E. Whitehead<BR>
<A href=3D"mailto:cewcathar at hotmail.com">cewcathar at hotmail.com</A> <BR><BR>=
From: John Cowan &lt=3Bcowan at ccil.org&gt=3B<BR>Subject: Re: LANGUAGE SUBTAG=
 REGISTRATION FORM: pinyin<BR>&nbsp=3B<BR>&gt=3B Gerard Meijssen scripsit:<=
BR> <BR>&gt=3B&gt=3B It is exactly when you are talking about Pinyin that t=
here is no relation at<BR>&gt=3B&gt=3B all between the written text in the =
logograms and the text written in the<BR>&gt=3B&gt=3B Latin script. <BR> <B=
R>&gt=3B Of course there's a relation: they are written forms of the same l=
anguage=2C<BR>&gt=3B Mandarin Chinese (subject to the qualifications I disc=
ussed in my last post).<BR> <BR>-- <BR>&gt=3B John Cowan <A href=3D"http://=
ccil.org/~cowan" target=3D_blank>http://ccil.org/~cowan</A> cowan at ccil.org<=
BR><BR></body>
</html>=

--_2275dd39-a0b5-4385-b628-feea4e3d8b69_--