I wanted a link to a wavefile (which I got BTW) as the Mirriam Webster
*for example*
Example for Mirriam Webster and not example for Matz.
hey how can I understand my posts, I am not at the same level as the poster.
Robert
···
On 3/10/07, Robert Dober <robert.dober@gmail.com> wrote:
--
We have not succeeded in answering all of our questions.
In fact, in some ways, we are more confused than ever.
But we feel we are confused on a higher level and about more important things.
-Anonymous
One thing that Japanese has over English is VERY regular
pronunciation, there are a smallish number of syllables, and a 1-1
correspondence between each character from either hiragana or katakana
with the syllable it represents.
GBS would not have been able to make his point if he were Japanese
instead of English.
···
On 3/9/07, Andrew Stewart <boss@airbladesoftware.com> wrote:
On 9 Mar 2007, at 15:40, John Joyce wrote:
> Very simple.
> ma (as in mama)
> tsu (as in tsunami)
> mo (as in mold)
> to (as in token)
Reminds me of the way George Bernard Shaw illustrated the
difficulties of English pronunciation:
gh (as in enough)
o (as in women)
ti (as in emotion)
One thing that Japanese has over English is VERY regular
pronunciation, there are a smallish number of syllables, and a 1-1
correspondence between each character from either hiragana or katakana
with the syllable it represents.
Such is also the case with the syllabic languages of India and
linguistically related parts of South East Asia. There is an exact one
to one mapping between syllables and sounds -- it sounds how it appears
and it's written how it sounds. Thus, there is no "hooked on phonics"
training from a young age. Furthermore, we do not have spelling bees in
our native languages because everyone would win!
IMHO, the primary benefit of such languages is not having to remember
how particular words are pronounced. Thus you have all this extra human
memory space (which would otherwise contain mappings from particular
words to sounds) that you can instead fill with vocabulary or poetry or
whatever.
Finally, it is said that the order of vowels in the Japanese alphabet
system is derived from that of Sanskrit. For instance, listed below are
the vowels from the South Indian Telugu language (the same vowels are
found in nearly all other Indian languages in exactly the same order).
The starred (*) vowels are found in Japanese (a i u e o).
start
···
-------------------
a (c[u]t) *
aa (say [aa]h)
i ([i]t) *
ii (f[ee]t)
u (fl[u]) *
uu (f[oo]d)
e (s[ay]) *
ee (th[ey]!!)
ai (l[ie])
o (g[o]) *
oo (cr[ow])
au (c[ow])
=================== # below are not really vowels, in the English sense
am (r[um])
ah (buff)
-------------------
end
Finally, it is said that the order of vowels in the Japanese alphabet
system is derived from that of Sanskrit.
Correction: the ordering of vowels is derived from the ancient Brahmi
script[2]. Interestingly, it seems there are also parallels in the
ordering of consonants (ka ... ta ... ya ra ... va).
In message "Re: the name of Matz" on Sat, 10 Mar 2007 12:08:22 +0900, Suraj Kurapati <snk@gna.org> writes:
Finally, it is said that the order of vowels in the Japanese alphabet
system is derived from that of Sanskrit. For instance, listed below are
the vowels from the South Indian Telugu language (the same vowels are
found in nearly all other Indian languages in exactly the same order).
The starred (*) vowels are found in Japanese (a i u e o).
Wow, I didn't know that. Thank you for information.
I've also heard that there are certain linguistic similarities which
indicate that Japanese and Finnish are close relatives, not that I
know what those are or have any clue why it might be so.
···
On 3/10/07, Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@ruby-lang.org> wrote:
Hi,
In message "Re: the name of Matz" > on Sat, 10 Mar 2007 12:08:22 +0900, Suraj Kurapati <snk@gna.org> writes:
>Finally, it is said that the order of vowels in the Japanese alphabet
>system is derived from that of Sanskrit. For instance, listed below are
>the vowels from the South Indian Telugu language (the same vowels are
>found in nearly all other Indian languages in exactly the same order).
>The starred (*) vowels are found in Japanese (a i u e o).
Wow, I didn't know that. Thank you for information.
Suraj Kurapati wrote:
> Finally, it is said that the order of vowels in the Japanese alphabet
> system is derived from that of Sanskrit.
Correction: the ordering of vowels is derived from the ancient Brahmi
script[2]. Interestingly, it seems there are also parallels in the
ordering of consonants (ka ... ta ... ya ra ... va).
On 3/10/07, Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@ruby-lang.org> wrote:
Hi,
In message "Re: the name of Matz" >> on Sat, 10 Mar 2007 12:08:22 +0900, Suraj Kurapati <snk@gna.org> >> writes:
>Finally, it is said that the order of vowels in the Japanese alphabet
>system is derived from that of Sanskrit. For instance, listed below are
>the vowels from the South Indian Telugu language (the same vowels are
>found in nearly all other Indian languages in exactly the same order).
>The starred (*) vowels are found in Japanese (a i u e o).
Wow, I didn't know that. Thank you for information.
I've also heard that there are certain linguistic similarities which
indicate that Japanese and Finnish are close relatives, not that I
know what those are or have any clue why it might be so.
Yes, the world is a *very* interesting place indeed when you subtract out the Indo-European languages, Chinese, and the Semitic languages (Hebrew and Arabic).
> Hi,
>
> >Finally, it is said that the order of vowels in the Japanese alphabet
> >system is derived from that of Sanskrit. For instance, listed below are
> >the vowels from the South Indian Telugu language (the same vowels are
> >found in nearly all other Indian languages in exactly the same order).
> >The starred (*) vowels are found in Japanese (a i u e o).
>
> Wow, I didn't know that. Thank you for information.
>
I've also heard that there are certain linguistic similarities which
indicate that Japanese and Finnish are close relatives, not that I
know what those are or have any clue why it might be so.
I would take this information with care,
Finnish and Hungarian for that matter are very difficult to categorize
and therefore sometimes put together with other languages. FWIK they
are still pretty far apart, nothing like e.g. French and Italian.
Cheers
Robert
···
On 3/10/07, Rick DeNatale <rick.denatale@gmail.com> wrote:
On 3/10/07, Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@ruby-lang.org> wrote:
> In message "Re: the name of Matz" > > on Sat, 10 Mar 2007 12:08:22 +0900, Suraj Kurapati <snk@gna.org> writes:
--
We have not succeeded in answering all of our questions.
In fact, in some ways, we are more confused than ever.
But we feel we are confused on a higher level and about more important things.
-Anonymous
No, there are none. Japanese has a strong relation to Korean. Both have a relation to Mongolian.
As for written ordering, it only indicates some exchange of ideas probably indirectly through religious texts. writing was borrowed from China and phonetic characters were developed later as simplified caligraphic forms of Chinese characters.
···
On Mar 11, 2007, at 5:15 AM, Rick DeNatale wrote:
I've also heard that there are certain linguistic similarities which
indicate that Japanese and Finnish are close relatives, not that I
know what those are or have any clue why it might be so.
Well it appears that there are at least some linquists who beleive
that there may be a relationship between Finnish and Japanese,
although not as close as I implied.
Describes a (controversial) theory that they are related by a common
extinct ancestor language.
Ural-Altaic
Ural
Finno-Permic
Finnish
Altaic
Mongolic
Mongolian
Japonic
Japanese,
Korean
Which would make Finnish and Japanese second cousins.
There are actually two levels of controversy in these theories. One
is whether or not there really was a prototypical Ural-Altaic which
was a common ancestor of the Ural and Altaic families. Second is
whether or not the Japonic family (which includes Japanese, Okinawan,
and some others I haven't heard of), and Korean which forms it's own
family, should really be considered members of the Altaic family.
···
On 3/11/07, John Joyce <dangerwillrobinsondanger@gmail.com> wrote:
On Mar 11, 2007, at 5:15 AM, Rick DeNatale wrote:
>
> I've also heard that there are certain linguistic similarities which
> indicate that Japanese and Finnish are close relatives, not that I
> know what those are or have any clue why it might be so.
No, there are none. Japanese has a strong relation to Korean. Both
have a relation to Mongolian.
>
> >
> > I've also heard that there are certain linguistic similarities which
> > indicate that Japanese and Finnish are close relatives, not that I
> > know what those are or have any clue why it might be so.
>
> No, there are none. Japanese has a strong relation to Korean. Both
> have a relation to Mongolian.
Well it appears that there are at least some linquists who beleive
that there may be a relationship between Finnish and Japanese,
although not as close as I implied.
Describes a (controversial) theory that they are related by a common
extinct ancestor language.
Interesting stuff Rick
Ural-Altaic
Ural
Finno-Permic
Finnish
Altaic
Mongolic
Mongolian
Japonic
Japanese,
Korean
Which would make Finnish and Japanese second cousins.
Is this list complete? I am missing Hungarian who is a far relative of Finnish.
There are actually two levels of controversy in these theories. One
is whether or not there really was a prototypical Ural-Altaic which
was a common ancestor of the Ural and Altaic families. Second is
whether or not the Japonic family (which includes Japanese, Okinawan,
and some others I haven't heard of), and Korean which forms it's own
family, should really be considered members of the Altaic family.
On 3/11/07, Rick DeNatale <rick.denatale@gmail.com> wrote:
On 3/11/07, John Joyce <dangerwillrobinsondanger@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mar 11, 2007, at 5:15 AM, Rick DeNatale wrote:
--
We have not succeeded in answering all of our questions.
In fact, in some ways, we are more confused than ever.
But we feel we are confused on a higher level and about more important things.
-Anonymous
