Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,668
Thanks:
0
we're all gonna have to learn chinese anyway may as well start writing English in hanzi...
hiragana/katakana are both fine for writing japanese words, and foreign words when they are rendered into japanese.
If you really want to retain the pronunciation of the source word better, you could do it by just adding extra katakana spelling conventions. For example "cat" could be キャットッ or something. There are existing conventions for rendering 'th' 'l' etc in katakana, just no one uses them.
@jimmyseal
ai bribouz raitiŋ iŋgliβ laik θ'is iuziŋ θ'ə volouiŋ 21 led'ə ælvəb'ed:
aiueoəæbcdvkhlmnŋrsθβ'-
ru-ls':
ə='er' in her
æ='a' in cat
'=濁音
- ridən a-vtə a v'aul ekstend's' it
b=p b'=b
c=ch c'=j
d=t t'=d
v=f v'=v
k=k k'=g
s=s s'=z
θ='th' in thick θ'='th' in the
β=sh β'= french j
u invrant ov' oθ'ə v'auls' b'ikams' w.
i invrant ov' oθ'ə v'auls' b'ikams' y.
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 3,944
Thanks:
11
Honestly there's nothing inherently superior about B, it's just that we're more used to it so it's easier for us to read. It's not so much that A is worse, but it's not better either so there's no point in changing things. Getting rid of katakana to save Japanese people from learning 46 extra symbols isn't worth the trouble.
Edited: 2012-01-18, 9:00 am
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 3,944
Thanks:
11
It's not only logistics, but cultural factors as well. There's simply no motivation or political will to force such a change, and that's likely to remain so for the near future, at least.'
But we're talking about two different things here. Replacing katakana with romaji isn't really that useful, although as I've said in the past, I am at least theoretically in favor of Japanese switching entirely to romaji.
Replacing the loan words with the words from the source language is just silly, though.
Edited: 2012-01-18, 9:02 am
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 991
Thanks:
0
Yes, easier to read, for Japanese people.
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 464
Thanks:
0
Not after the first generation that uses them. Even then they are familiar with it. They are taught how to write in romaji in school. They are taught how to write English. They encounter romaji in everyday life. It's not as large of a change as you make it out to be.
It's kinda sad that they seem to know that their language could be vastly improved but they lack the willpower and resources to give enough of a damn.
Edited: 2012-01-18, 9:16 am
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 991
Thanks:
0
Seriously, have you ever been to Japan? Been inside a school there?
Every single living Japanese person who went to school in the last 65 years has learned romaji and studied English for a minimum of 3 years and had a lifetime of exposure to romaji and other blasts of random English....and yet they still suck ass at it.
The younger generations who studied English for 6 years still suck at it. College educated people who had 9 years of study? No better.
Katakana is easier to read than romaji.
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 374
Thanks:
0
It was mentioned a few pages back but glossed over.
In ENGLISH, we don't pronounce restaurant with a French accent.
We certainly don't pronounce Karaoke correctly, and if you did in front of other English speakers (who didn't speak Japanese) you'd be looked at funny and called a pretentious prick.
English takes just as many foreign words and butchers them beyond all belief, it's rather arrogant of us English speakers to even say things that katakana loans words are mangled foreign words and so they should just use the English words because it'll help their English (yes they are.. but as we are guilty of it just as much, pot-kettle. black)
Have I found myself tongue-tied in Japanese conversation because I've had to force myself to say the Japanese pronunciation when my brain is desperately trying to correct it for me mid sentence? yes.. trying to pronounce [シートベルト] in class one day took me 4 attempts because as I got half way through the word, my mind auto corrected to English and I said [シートbelt] 3 times. Katakana words, are Japanese words.
But I speak English, so they should too! They should understand me!!!11!
It's a very arrogant system, made for lazy English speakers who don't want to learn another language but want to pretend they have, like all those people who are "fluent" at Spanish because they can order a drink at a bar.
Edited: 2012-01-18, 3:04 pm
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 670
Thanks:
0
Here's the thing. The japanese learning english is optional. No really, *that's* why they on average suck at it. Japan is a big enough country with a big enough economy that Japanese is a world language. In the sense that you could go to any random country as a tourist and expect to be understood? No, of course not. But your average japanese person, in their daily life, has little need for english.
Asia is not like europe. Last time i was in Europe, I was told stories of italians speaking to germans in english as a common language. There are so many major and minor languages there that english just makes sense. There are only 3 languages that count in asia, besides English: Japanse, Korean, Mandarin (you could make an argument for Cantonese). Of these, Japanese has by far the highest status. If you're in asia and you speak another language, guess what, the burden is on you to communicate. If you, as a japanese person, need to do business in china, guess what? They'll give you someone who speaks japanese.
Mangling the japanese language to make it easier for japanese people to learn english misses the point: that's not why their english is bad. And frankly, as an english speaker, i see no reason why they should be forced to learn english. Sure, everyone should be forced to study a foreign language in school, it's good for the brain, and it makes sense that that language be English. But i don't think their lack of success is relevant. I did german in school and can't speak a word.
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 946
Thanks:
0
touché!
(i pronounced it as "touch," just to piss everyone off. also i had to copy paste the accent mark on the e because i don't know how to write that. i don't know if that's even common.)
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 114
Thanks:
0
Is it too-shay, or is it too-shee?