Talk:欧罗巴
Latest comment: 10 years ago by Atitarev in topic Hakka
Hakka
edit@Atitarev Can I ask what reference you used for that? I can't seem to find it anywhere. Wyang (talk) 03:32, 27 May 2014 (UTC)
- I used this [1] and checked individual characters. I can't link the entry, you'll have to search for it. The link (78) shows the scanned dictionary page where 歐羅巴 = Eu. lô pa. I normalised the spelling as in the site
- 漢字 歐羅巴
- 客語 eu-lô-pa
- 解釋 Europe
- 原圖掃描 78
--Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 03:37, 27 May 2014 (UTC)
- I see. The dictionary is from 1905 though - the period during which you would expect words like "Europe" to have just been translated into Chinese. Modern Hakka would be different - w:hak:Êu-chû. Wyang (talk) 03:41, 27 May 2014 (UTC)
- I have added "êu-chû" as the first reading for "歐洲". This is a modern site, though, they use "eu-lô-pa". Are you against using this site as a reference? Do you want to edit 歐羅巴? Modern Hakka is often written in hanzi, anyway, perhaps more than Min Nan. I saw a few Hakka song lyrics in Han characters.--Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 03:50, 27 May 2014 (UTC)
- The romanisation in that book is not POJ... For example, 花 in that dictionary is 'fa', whereas POJ is w:hak:fâ. The romanisation this site gives seems to be POJ. Wyang (talk) 04:03, 27 May 2014 (UTC)
- I had trouble adding any Hakka without "=poj". Our existing or new Hakka entries use poj= and a list of various transliterations, including numbered. If not POJ, what is it? --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 04:13, 27 May 2014 (UTC)
- The romanisation in that book is not POJ... For example, 花 in that dictionary is 'fa', whereas POJ is w:hak:fâ. The romanisation this site gives seems to be POJ. Wyang (talk) 04:03, 27 May 2014 (UTC)
- Gosh, I hate these different transcriptions. They are inherited from User:Bumm13's Template:hak-hanzi. I don't know what the "POJ" system is exactly, presumably it's the variant of Min Nan POJ used to write Hakka, although there doesn't seem to be any documentation in Wikipedia and it is confusingly also called "白話字" (same as Pha̍k-fa-sṳ). This dictionary doesn't seem to give Pha̍k-fa-sṳ or POJ, rather, as w:Pha̍k-fa-sṳ explains, it gives an old system that is not proper Pha̍k-fa-sṳ. Wyang (talk) 04:25, 27 May 2014 (UTC)
- That means all Hakka poj instances need to be replaced with pfs or smth else? I see poj is no longer working. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 05:30, 27 May 2014 (UTC)
- If they are genuine PFS, which can be confirmed by this site. If it is copied from this dictionary, then it is not any of POJ, Guangdong, Hagfa Pinyim, PFS... Wyang (talk) 05:37, 27 May 2014 (UTC)
- That means all Hakka poj instances need to be replaced with pfs or smth else? I see poj is no longer working. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 05:30, 27 May 2014 (UTC)
- Gosh, I hate these different transcriptions. They are inherited from User:Bumm13's Template:hak-hanzi. I don't know what the "POJ" system is exactly, presumably it's the variant of Min Nan POJ used to write Hakka, although there doesn't seem to be any documentation in Wikipedia and it is confusingly also called "白話字" (same as Pha̍k-fa-sṳ). This dictionary doesn't seem to give Pha̍k-fa-sṳ or POJ, rather, as w:Pha̍k-fa-sṳ explains, it gives an old system that is not proper Pha̍k-fa-sṳ. Wyang (talk) 04:25, 27 May 2014 (UTC)
- You probably want to first globally replace all our merged entries "=poj" to "=pfs" (for Hakka), otherwise Hakka terms lose displayed pronunciations and PoS categories. Gradually, we should fix to use correct PFS transliteration but it's harder when they are not visible. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 05:40, 27 May 2014 (UTC)