Proposed new record for 'wadegile'
doug at ewellic.org
Sun Sep 28 04:10:15 CEST 2008
Michael Everson <everson at evertype dot com> wrote:
>> .s/, typically//
> I do not know what these solidi mean, but I will not agree to remove
> "typically" because there is no guarantee that Wade-Giles orthography
> was never used for a non-Mandarin dialect of Chinese.
They mean what you suspect, that Randy proposes to remove (e.g.) the
string ", typically" with the empty string, thus deleting the content.
>>> in the romanization developed by Thomas Wade in the mid-19th
>>> and reached settled form with Herbert Giles'Chinese-English
>> .s/'/' /
> I have no idea what you mean by this.
The same: replace the passage between the first and second slashes by
the passage between the second and third.
Here Randy has a good point: the sentence is ungrammatical as it stands,
and there needs to be a space between "Giles'" and "Chinese".
>> I find the statement "in all books on China published before 1979"
>> The textbook we used when I studied Mandarin used pinyin exclusively,
>> and was published in 1978. I recall the switch to pinyin in Chinese
>> place names (e.g. Beijing instead of Peking) in US magazines and
>> newspapers happening *long* before that.
> Mayhap, but the quotation comes from Krieger, Neill, and Reynolds 1997
> so they are responsible for its content.
Agreed. Mark put quotes around the passage and that lets us off the
hook. I suppose we could add "[sic]" if we wanted to call attention to
the authors' almost-certain factual error, but I don't see what that
would accomplish. The purpose of quoting that passage is clear: there
is a lot of extant material written in Wade-Giles, and that justifies a
Doug Ewell * Thornton, Colorado, USA * RFC 4645 * UTN #14
More information about the Ietf-languages