.

Gee, if only this had a wikipedia entry. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyrillization_of_Japanese

What Stansfield said. Although note that, even though the page is titled "Cyrillization of Japanese", the Polivanov system only really applies to Russian and, to varying extents, other Cyrillic-using languages of the former USSR (accounting for differences in character sets, orthographies, etc.), and not to the Cyrillic script as a whole. Based on my observations Serbian, Bulgarian and Macedonian transliterate from Hepburn like they normally would from English, whereas Mongolian seems to have its own system.

BTW, the official Cyrillic counterpart to the term ローマ字 (Rōmaji) is キリル文字 (Kiriru moji). I've seen the word キリ字 (Kiriji) in a few places, but I suspect that it's more of a slang term.

[Zgarbas]

Taking laddering to a new level: Using kiriji to learn cyrillic

.

My native language is in cyrillic....but I never use it to transcribe simply because all my sources are in English and romaji as john555 said the Japanese also use it all the time.

In my opinion the cyrillic will bring to me more confusion than clearness even it is my native alphabet.

vonPeterhof Wrote:Based on my observations Serbian, Bulgarian and Macedonian transliterate from Hepburn like they normally would from English, whereas Mongolian seems to have its own system.

Some Russians use a nonofficial Hepburn-in-cyrillic transliteration, too, because they consider it to be more accurate or agreeable to hear or just because they are ignorant 一般人's. Needless to say, they are all wrong. Just kidding. There have been constant debates over shi-si, chan-tyan and so on. If you understand Russian, check it out: http://www.susi.ru/SusiOrSushi.html

Yeah, debates happen on a daily basis. For instance, some think it's better to say "Sushi bar", others -- "Susi bar".

onami Wrote:

vonPeterhof Wrote:Based on my observations Serbian, Bulgarian and Macedonian transliterate from Hepburn like they normally would from English, whereas Mongolian seems to have its own system.

Some Russians use a nonofficial Hepburn-in-cyrillic transliteration, too, because they consider it to be more accurate or agreeable to hear or just because they are ignorant 一般人's. Needless to say, they are all wrong. Just kidding. There have been constant debates over shi-si, chan-tyan and so on. If you understand Russian, check it out: http://www.susi.ru/SusiOrSushi.html

Yeah, мен орысша түсінемін , so I'm well aware of the "dispute". I was thinking of mentioning that in my first post, but then I noticed the Wikipedia article I linked to had a few paragraphs about it, so I didn't bother. And, if anyone cares about my opinion on this, I don't think there's any need to change anything in the s-row right now (although there might be in a few years), but the t-row needs to be updated to properly reflect the distinction between チ and ティ. Чи and ти seems like the least counter-intuitive way of doing that, but if Polivanov purists insist on retaining the current value of ти I'd be willing settle even for something more silly-looking (тъи? т'и? тхи? ТЭи?) as long as there's a distinction fully reflective of modern standard Japanese kana orthography. Or we could just stop pretending to be a Great Power (unlikely, in light of recent events) and go all-Hepburn like most normal countries