From: zlatev@an.isl.titech.ac.jp (Rossen Zlatev)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.bulgaria
Subject: Re: Latin->Cyrillic map
Date: 20 Nov 92 03:54:57 GMT
	<1992Nov7.180020.5057@wisipc.weizmann.ac.il>
	<ZLATEV.92Nov11185018@olive.an.isl.titech.ac.jp>
	<1992Nov16.231348.18151@wisipc.weizmann.ac.il>
Organization: Imaging Science and Engineering Lab., Tokyo Inst. of Tech., Japan
In-reply-to: lihouba@dapsas1's message of 16 Nov 92 23:13:48 GMT

In article <1992Nov16.231348.18151@wisipc.weizmann.ac.il> lihouba@dapsas1 (Christo Houbaviy) writes:

>>>[u], kato naprimer v 'quarter'. Na bqlgarski obache 'er-goljam - u' se
>>>sreshta mnogo rjadko (if at all), a shto se otnasja do kombinatsijata
>>>'ku' mnogo rjadko njakoi shte ja transkribira kato 'qu'.
>>
>>	E absolyutno pogreshno.

	Podvela me e lipsata na dumichkata "kombinatsiya" pred 
'er-golyam - u'. I tyi kato ima hora izpolzvashti "u" za "er-golyam",
i izglejda sym spal kato sym chel statiyata, sym dostignal do pogreshno
zaklyuchenie.
	Izvinyavam se!

>I nakraja vqv vrqzka s tsjalata tazi diskusija po transliteratsijata
>eto kakvo se pojavi v rec.humor (mai nie tochno kqm tova se stremim :-)):
>
>PLAN FOR IMPROVEMENT OF ENGLISH SPELLING by MARK TWAIN
>
>	 For example, in Year 1 that useless letter "c" would be dropped
>to be replased either by "k" or "s", and likewise "x" would no longer
>be part of the alphabet. The only kase in which "c" would be retained
>would be the "ch" formation, which will be dealt with later. Year 2
>might reform "w" spelling, so that "which" and "one" would take the
>same konsonant, wile Year 3 might wll abolish "y" replasing it with
>"i" and Iear 4 might fiks the "g/j" anomali wonse and for all.
>	 Jenerally, Then, the improvement would kontinue iear bai iear
>with Iear 5 doing awai with useless double konsonants, and Iears 6-12
>or so modifaiing vowlz and the remeining voist and unvoist konsonants.
>Bai Iear 15 or sou, it wud fainali bi posibl tu meik ius ov thi
>ridandant letez "c", "y" and "x" -- bai now jast a memori in the maindz
>ov ould doderez -- tu riplais "ch", "sh" and "th" rispektivli.
>	 Fainali, xen, aafte sam 20 iears ov orxogrefkl riform, wi wud
>hev a lojikl, kohirnt speling in ius xrewawt xe Ingliy-spiking werld.
>
>
>XP|/|CTO

	Izglejda dosta nepriyatno, meko kazano. No kato komentar iskam
da spodelya slednite misli. Tseliya tozi razgovor za namirane na kirilitsa,
s koyato da komunikirame pomejdu si, e za da namerim chitaem i lesno pisaem
variant za izrazyavane na kirilitsata s latinski bukvi. Vyobshte ne stava
vypros za promyana na bylgarskiya pravopis, gramatika i t.n. 
	Izpolzvam sluchaya i shte napisha neshto nekasaeshto konkretnata
statiya. Iskam da povtorya oshte vednyj moeto lichno mnenie za taka nare-
chenata kirilizatsiya. A to e che lesno nyama da se postigne "standart".
Vinagi shte ima nyakoi, koito ne shte e syglasen s opredelena bukva.
Zatova si mislya, che ako vseki pishe na standarta s koito e sviknal,
postepenno shte se poluchi edin standart za s.c.b. 
	Eto i moeto mnenie za nyakoi ot transkriptsiite, poyavili se v s.c.b.
Transkriptsiyata na statiyata na koyato otgovaryam e dosta udobna za chetene,
vypreki che se razlichava malko ot nachina po koito az pisha.
	Lichno za men transkriptsiyata na "A7571DAC@vm.u" e mnogo trudno
chitaema. Dori ne moga da procheta imeto mu - B^agu?! Syjalyavam no chesto
pyti dori ne moga da razbera vsichki dumichki v zaglavieto. Znam che ako
razpechatam transkriptsiite i si gi postavya na kompyutyra i vseki pyt
ako imam neshto neyasno gi poglejdam, to shte moga da razcheta statiite.
No nyama sila, koyato da me nakara da go napravya. 
	Ne kritikuvam izpolzvanite transkriptsii. Prosto kazvam moeto
lichno mnenie. 

Vsichko hubavo: Rossen