Talk:Hong Kong Government Cantonese Romanisation

message: This page was voted on for deletion at Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Hong Kong Government Cantonese Romanisation.  The consensus was to keep it.  There was some suggestion that it should be moved to a better title, though what that title is was unclear.  dbenbenn | talk 00:32, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: It's really an interesting topic, i always wonder who determine the romanisation since i was a child. Let us put the thing in this way: now suppose u are newly employed in the HK Immigration Department, and ur job requires u to romanize the Chinese names of ur clients. And on ur first day, ur fat and rude supervisor throw u a table, saying: "follow this table for the romanisation!" It this were so, then we could say that the HK government actually sets standards on how Cantonese is romananised in HK. Obviously the best way to solve the problem is to ask someone who works in the HK government. Right? --K.C. Tang 03:29, 5 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Do other departments, let's say, the Company Registry, do the something similar too?  — Instantnood 14:17, 5 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: yes, i wonder if there are some kind of internal guideline circulating in the government. but i dun know anyone who works in the government, and, woe to me, i'm yet to find a well-paid little-to-do job within the bureaucracy.--K.C. Tang 01:18, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

text: Cantonese missionary romanization being the Meyer-Wempe system, of course. --Yuje 03:03, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

text: Thanks so much Yuje. Is there any information on the Eitel system from resources on the Internet? — Instantnood 18:17, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not sure, the system is pretty old and predates most of the modern Romanization systems. My dictionary was originally published in 1946, and then republished in the 1986 by the Hong Kong University Press. It doesn't actually use the Eitel system, but Meyer-Wempe, but it has a chart which shows thd difference between the two systems. Mainly, initials and finals are the same, but long vowels like á become aa and ó become oh in Meyer-Wempe. In any case, the system seems very similar to Wade-Giles, and I wouldn't be surprised if this system was inspired, influenced, or modified from that. The HK government system is very similar to Postal System Pinyin, where the system is used with apostrophes and diacritics dropped, and long-established romanizations overriding the standard. If I'm not mistaken, Hong Kong, Kowloon, and the use of "Lee" for 利 come from Hakka, don't they? --Yuje 02:35, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I googled "Eiten" and "Cantonese", and I managed to get the full name of this Mr Eiten. :-) — Instantnood 18:20, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I has probably come across with the the term Eiten in the book A Chinese Syllabary Pronounced according to the Dialect of Canton by S. L. Wong.  HenryLi 06:36, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: maybe we could incorpoarate the material of this discussion into the article?--K.C. Tang 00:53, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Started a blurb to introduce reader to the Eitel system. The details of the system could go into the body of the article. --Kvasir 08:36, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  interesting topic 

message: The article mentions that "Road" can be romanized as "Do". I have never seen this, and in addition this is a most unlikely spelling (because "d" is not supposed to appear). Can anyone substantiate this "do" spelling with an example of an actual street? Thank you.—Gniw (Wing) 17:55, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: u mean the sentence 'For place names, "Street" and "Road" are often used instead of "Kai" and "Do"...'? there are no road with "Do", i guess... --K.C. Tang 13:11, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: yes, i mean that sentence. first, if it says "often" (instead of "always") it means sometimes "Kai" and "Do" are used in real street names; secondly, it says "Do" instead of "To" (which should be how it would be spelt according to what we know about the system).—Gniw (Wing) 17:06, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: u can correct that, i guess, if no one voices objections here in the coming few days. :D --K.C. Tang 00:00, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I have changed it to something hopefully more accurate.—Gniw (Wing) 04:36, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Do 

message: A  Portuguese-based yet pretty similar system is used in Macao. Is there any folks familiar with that system? — Instantnood 20:35, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Macao

message: If it is not an official name, then at least the capital letters should be removed to get "HK government Cantonese romanisation". However, a better name would be "Cantonese romanisation in the HK government" or similar. 118.90.59.31 (talk) 10:26, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article title 

message: Noted that an industrious editor has decided to add Yale Romanisation to the tables.  This is not such a great idea for the following reasons:  (1)  there can be no end to it - why add Yale and not all the rest?  (2) Yale was not created until about than 70 years after HKGov.  If any other systems are to find their presence on this page, they ought to be relevant to the HKGov system, i.e. thought to be precursors of it.  Now, you might be inclined to retort that it's helpful to readers to see how HKGov differs from other known systems.  I would agree with that sentiment but return to my first point:  where do you stop?  Too many systems, keep it relevant.  So, subject to views to be expressed here, I intend to remove the Yale addition.  sirlanz 09:00, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Yale and Jyutping are the two most common Cantonese romanizations, there are myriad others but not at the level of use or recommendation that these two see. Stopping exactly at this point is entirely appropriate. clacke (talk) 02:56, 30 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: General Cantonese Romanisation page or about Hong Kong Government Romanisation?