sgcdonmai said: I have one:
"What's with the lemons?"
As far as I've ever read, it's a parody of a TV Guide type magazine in Japan where the same thing is done. Not coincidentally, also published by Kadokawa.
Edit: finally found an example
Posted under General
sgcdonmai said: I have one:
"What's with the lemons?"
As far as I've ever read, it's a parody of a TV Guide type magazine in Japan where the same thing is done. Not coincidentally, also published by Kadokawa.
Edit: finally found an example
jxh2154 said:
So when you say "Danbooru does not encourage people to write "Itou Noiji" in other contexts," my response is (and don't take this the wrong way) - speak for yourself! I certainly encourage it. But neither of us (no one person, not even albert) "is" Danbooru in the abstract sense anyway, so we can't speak for it either.
Heh, I was sort of expecting something like this, that is why I began my first message above with "My interpretation (...)". I was curious to see some reactions, to tell you the truth.
Why did I edit the wiki, then? I honestly (but perhaps incorrectly) thought that stressing the "we do this for ourselves, not to create a new world order" idea might decrease the number of needless clashes with people who consider Danbooru a power-abusing authority. Less clashes, more tagging and wiki editing.
If "take this the wrong way" refers to a possibility of me feeling personally offended -- no, I certainly do not.
I am completely happy with Danbooru using a waapuro-style system, and using it consistently. It has been surprisingly easy to adjust to. But I cannot see myself promoting it elsewhere, and especially not for exclusive worldwide use. If you happen to be interested in my reasonings, here are two of them:
Katajanmarja said: I honestly (but perhaps incorrectly) thought that stressing the "we do this for ourselves, not to create a new world order" idea might decrease the number of needless clashes with people who consider Danbooru a power-abusing authority. Less clashes, more tagging and wiki editing
There's no real point in worrying about "clashes" of this sort, and I'm not sure why you'd ever think the above was a concern.
(Also, macrons are worse than genocide. Just sayin'.)
EB said:
"Noizi" is more of a stylistic thing but isn't with Danbooru's standard on romanization and makes it easier for Westerners to mispronounce her name.
heeheehee, "Noizy".
jxh2154 said:
(Also, macrons are worse than genocide. Just sayin'.)
Well, they're definitely more intuitive for regular Englishers (without some familiarity or prompt, I'd'nt read "oo" as "oh", but "uu"; hell, I still say "Da[a]nbuuru").
Updated
As far as this topic is concerned, I agree with jxh2154 that to no small degree we try to spread our standardized system of romanization (and not primarily just for names).
While I doubt we'll have much of an affect with anyone except the members of our own community, the 1-to-1 correspondence between kana and romaji makes a ton of sense, and is an idea that should be promoted.
Artists are free to pick their own romanization style if they want for their own personal names, but so long as they agree on the pronunciation of their name (the kana writing of it), they should understand why we spell it as we do.
As for generic words, I can't think of any good reason why someone within or outside Danbooru would have for picking an inconsistant romanization scheme.
Also, I second the disagreement with jxh2154 that macrons are necessarily bad. They are a pain to type, and that's a good reason not to use them. But for reading, I think they are fine, and not a bad way to represent long vowels.
Katajanmarja said:
I am completely happy with Danbooru using a waapuro-style system, and using it consistently.
Strictly speaking, we don't use waapuro romanisation. Waapuro schemes have to be unambiguous, hence all the "noidi" ideas. We use more or less just revised hepburn without macrons, because as jxh2154 says, macrons are worse than genocide.
- If I should globally standardize the romanization of Japanese, I would certainly go for a pure transcription (something like Itō Noiji) or for a pure transliteration (something like Itou Noidi), not for a mix-up.
You're confusing "transcription" with "using only single characters for sounds". It's perfectly fine to use digraphs; in fact that's exactly what happens when you write "ji" or "shi". Or IPA /tʃ/ for that matter. Our scheme *is* almost pure transcription, with the sole exception of "wo", which is not done because it's infinitely less confusing this way. Oh, and the "oo"/"ou" split, which is just the way things are.
Shinjidude said:
While I doubt we'll have much of an affect with anyone except the members of our own community, the 1-to-1 correspondence between kana and romaji makes a ton of sense, and is an idea that should be promoted.
But we don't use it here :) See all my crusades against, say, "Haduki". We spell the phonetic value, not the original spelling.
葉月 said:
We spell the phonetic value, not the original spelling.
Lies, and for good reasons. As far as I know, Danbooru's raison d'être is trying to collect, organize and sometimes translate good anime related art, not to educate the public on foreign pronunciation. I don't see why we'd even care about phonetics until such a time that Danbooru gets a voice controlled tagging interface.
... Well, I don't really want to throw fuel at a romanization discussion, but I'm interested in why you think otherwise.
葉月 said:
But we don't use it here :) See all my crusades against, say, "Haduki".
Well I think "Haduki" is a special case with certain particular reasons for non-compliance....
While we may not be 100% compliant with our own system, at least we *try* to enforce it within ourselves.
zatchii said:
Lies, and for good reasons. As far as I know, Danbooru's raison d'être is trying to collect, organize and sometimes translate good anime related art, not to educate the public on foreign pronunciation. I don't see why we'd even care about phonetics until such a time that Danbooru gets a voice controlled tagging interface.
Just because consistent transliteration isn't our primary focus I don't see any reason why we *shouldn't* enforce it. It makes things so much easier say when trying to figure out which tag to use for a character or artist, when oftentimes the same character or artist is romanized three or four different ways outside our site. So long as you follow the consistent rules you *know* which romanization to use here.
Soljashy said:
I think zatchii's question was why we're using this particular system (i.e. one that is focused on phonetics).
Except for ぢ/じ, ず/づ and topic marker は, the current system shows spelling, not pronunciation (Except that showing spelling gives an unambiguous pronunciation, as opposed to vice versa).
