討論準化:原則譯各名詞𥢆㗂日
About the translation for Wago
Danh từ riêng Hoà ngữ được viết phiên âm và đọc theo cách phát âm trong tiếng Nhật (kun'yomi) thay vì chữ Hán dùng cho từ đó và phát âm Hán Việt của nó.
Wago proper nouns will be written phonetically as a transcription and pronounced as Japanese's kun'yomi, instead of being written in Kanji or any Han script and pronounced as Han-Viet. -- Nguyễn Việt Khôi（SaigonSarang (討論) 17:03 次𠄩 𣈜5𣎃1𢆥2015 (ICT)）
My opinion
I agree with the policy in general. Since we use Chuhan here, it's better to write all Japanese words that can be written in Kanji with Chuhan directly. In order not to confuse some points, we can add Romaji if possible.
- I think the way that the author used here is adaptable: 幕府德川--to add Romaji above Chuhan.
杜澎栩 （討論） 21:49 次𠄩 𣈜5𣎃1𢆥2015 (ICT)
- I personally don't think it is very good to add Japanese readings on Vietnamese Chuhan as ruby.
As far as I know, many Vietnamese people read 富士 (Mountain Fuji) as “phú sĩ”, according to the Vietnamese reading of the Kanji, but not the Japanese reading.
I think Vietnamese reading and Japanese readings are both applicable according to people’s preferences. So a translated Japanese proper noun may have 2 readings. Adding 2 readings on top of one Chuhan is not quite suitable. Besides, I think ruby is a tool for learning the pronunciations of Chu Han-Nom. For the pronunciation of foreign languages, we can use brackets. -- SaigonSarang (討論) 09:13 次𠀧 𣈜6𣎃1𢆥2015 (ICT)
- I personally don't think it is very good to add Japanese readings on Vietnamese Chuhan as ruby.
- Oh, you reminded me about how Japanese deal with the reading of Chinese proper noun. You can see it on this picture: [1] 「盧溝橋」 They put the Onyomi above the Kanji and the Chinese reading below. As for our Wiki, if we only give the Kanji (Chuhan) and Kanji's Vietnamese reading, some Japanese proper nouns that are usually introduced in Romaji will be unrecognizable (Of course ther are still many Japanese proper nouns are usually written in am Han-Viet, but more words are simply written in Romaji). But if we add both Romaji and the Vietnamese reading of the Kanji, it will both let the reader know how it reads and how it's written in Quoc Ngu Wikipedia and other Quoc Ngu Vietnamese articles. Maybe we can consider adopting this?
杜澎栩 （討論） 18:11 次𠀧 𣈜6𣎃1𢆥2015 (ICT)
- Oh, you reminded me about how Japanese deal with the reading of Chinese proper noun. You can see it on this picture: [1] 「盧溝橋」 They put the Onyomi above the Kanji and the Chinese reading below. As for our Wiki, if we only give the Kanji (Chuhan) and Kanji's Vietnamese reading, some Japanese proper nouns that are usually introduced in Romaji will be unrecognizable (Of course ther are still many Japanese proper nouns are usually written in am Han-Viet, but more words are simply written in Romaji). But if we add both Romaji and the Vietnamese reading of the Kanji, it will both let the reader know how it reads and how it's written in Quoc Ngu Wikipedia and other Quoc Ngu Vietnamese articles. Maybe we can consider adopting this?
- It is a good idea to put Japanese readings under Chuhan. The different places of the rubies may give hints to Han-Nom beginners that the one below Chuhan may not the Vietnamese reading. But, do you know how to enable it on wiki? --SaigonSarang (討論) 20:21 次𠀧 𣈜6𣎃1𢆥2015 (ICT)
![[1]](http://upload.m4.cn/2013/0314/thumb_940__1363226291860.jpg){kind=link}