Talk:Pyongyang: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
imported>Ro Thorpe |
imported>Hayford Peirce (→Spelling: Daniel is on the wrong side of CZ history here) |
||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
The same is true of 'Pyongyang', and it's one letter less. This has all the hallmarks of a misguided reform. I looked in the Wicked Pedia: [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revised_Romanisation_of_Korean#Criticism]. [[User:Ro Thorpe|Ro Thorpe]] 02:28, 31 October 2009 (UTC) | The same is true of 'Pyongyang', and it's one letter less. This has all the hallmarks of a misguided reform. I looked in the Wicked Pedia: [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revised_Romanisation_of_Korean#Criticism]. [[User:Ro Thorpe|Ro Thorpe]] 02:28, 31 October 2009 (UTC) | ||
:I have just Googled the matter and the version with the "E" has about 75,000 hits and the traditional spelling has about 3 or 4 *million*. I really think that the article title should be restored to the original. This is the sort of argument that has raged for years here at CZ -- and in every case Larry, as EiC, always came down on the side of the traditional and usual spelling. Since Daniel is not an Editor in Linguistics, or Far Eastern Culture, or Korean History, or whatnot, I don't think he has any particular credentials for making this change. If, in the next day or so, I don't see compelling arguments in favor of this new spelling, I will restore it to the original. [[User:Hayford Peirce|Hayford Peirce]] 03:17, 31 October 2009 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 21:17, 30 October 2009
Spelling
This should be moved to 'Pyongyang': the longer spelling - who uses it? - looked like a mistake & I corrected it at North Korea. Ro Thorpe 21:14, 30 October 2009 (UTC) - Ah, the Revised Romanisation...not, it seems, a massive hit... Ro Thorpe 22:56, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
- The background is that "yeo" is a phoneme (and letter) different from "yo" (and "ye-o"): "Yeo" is pronounced similar to the "yo" in "Yoghurt", while "yo" is more like in "Yoga". And the main reasoning behind the revised romanization is that you can type it using only letters of the English alphabet. --Daniel Mietchen 01:48, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
The same is true of 'Pyongyang', and it's one letter less. This has all the hallmarks of a misguided reform. I looked in the Wicked Pedia: [1]. Ro Thorpe 02:28, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
- I have just Googled the matter and the version with the "E" has about 75,000 hits and the traditional spelling has about 3 or 4 *million*. I really think that the article title should be restored to the original. This is the sort of argument that has raged for years here at CZ -- and in every case Larry, as EiC, always came down on the side of the traditional and usual spelling. Since Daniel is not an Editor in Linguistics, or Far Eastern Culture, or Korean History, or whatnot, I don't think he has any particular credentials for making this change. If, in the next day or so, I don't see compelling arguments in favor of this new spelling, I will restore it to the original. Hayford Peirce 03:17, 31 October 2009 (UTC)