Michael Everson everson at
Tue Sep 9 22:35:36 CEST 2008

The fact that Wade-Giles is called "wēituǒmǎ pīnyīn" is irrelevant  
to the present conundrum.

On 9 Sep 2008, at 21:06, Kent Karlsson wrote:

> Doug Ewell wrote:
>> Kent Karlsson <kent dot karlsson14 at comhem dot se> wrote:
>>> But I note that the word "pinyin" may be unfortunate for this, since
>>> that word is used (with varying degrees of commonality) to several
>>> romanisations (including Wade-Giles) of different languages.
>> Using the word "Pinyin" to mean Wade-Giles would be a huge mistake in
>> terminology.  Even though "pinyin" in Chinese means "alphabet" (as  
>> John
>> has told us often), in the field of Chinese romanizations "Pinyin"  
>> and
>> "Wade-Giles" are very much used in contrast to each other.  I am no
>> expert in this field and even I know that.
> See, note point 3
> starting with "Weituoma Pīnyīn" (note the "pinyin" part) which  
> refers
> to Wade-Giles romanisation. See also the first sentence of
> 	/kent k
> _______________________________________________
> Ietf-languages mailing list
> Ietf-languages at

Michael Everson *

More information about the Ietf-languages mailing list