Disputatio:Aung San Suu Kyi

message: :Since the Burmese form of her last name is literally Kyi (there's no t or s in it), I wonder if a better Latin transcription would be Ci or possibly Cii. Do others have opinions about this?
replies: text: Is the form Mianmare invented or attested? I gather Aung San Suu Kyi herself doesn't like the name-changing business, so I have taken it out for the moment. Until someone gives Burma a new official name in Latin, what's wrong with Birmania? We are happy enough to use traditional Latin names elsewhere. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 15:25, 27 Februarii 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: :Birmania is fine with me, for the reason you mention. Happily we use traditional names in latin for places which have new modern names.--Ioshus (disp) 15:51, 27 Februarii 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: :: Birmania and its family are supposed to be etymologically related to Myanmar anyway (en:Explanation of the names of Burma/Myanmar) in which case it'd be somewhat parallel to using Jersey for Caesarea (another thing we don't do).  —Mucius Tever 23:55, 27 Februarii 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: :::From what I could tell at the rally in support of her in DC last month, the name spelled Kyi is pronounced [ʃi:], more or less like the English word she. ¶ At that rally, the speakers & chanters called the country Burma. IacobusAmor 00:17, 28 Februarii 2007 (UTC)
*Secutus sum transcriptionem phoneticam et russicam ad scribendum "tsii" vice "cii"--Marc mage 00:25, 28 Februarii 2007 (UTC)

text: Si verbum Anglicum Chicago Latine est Sicagum, verbum Birmanianum Kyi = [ʃi:] Latine est Si, non? IacobusAmor 00:37, 28 Februarii 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: :I wouldn't call Sicagum decisive though, especially as it's a Neograecism used mainly by Conventiculum people. Most other sources seem to use the Ch- form. --Iustinus 00:53, 28 Februarii 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: ::Either way, Tsii is problematic, as Latin ts might better represent [tʃ], not [ʃ]. Or, put another way, if Latin ts represents [ʃ], what Latin letters represent [tʃ]? I'd recommend [ʃ] = Latin s and [tʃ] = Latin ts and maybe [dʃ] = Latin dz. ¶ So it's Tsii, -orum then? IacobusAmor 03:52, 28 Februarii 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: :::Well, keep in mind that we are not generally in the business of fixing Romanization systems. Obviously many Europeans have names (both in the vernacular, and often in Latinized forms as well) that the Romans would never have been able to pronounce, especially if they saw them written, so we can't always pretend that the historical phonetic or graphemic system of classical Latin should be the rule.

text: :::Andrew suggests Ci because it's historically (I assume) /kji/ but actually pronounced [t∫i], in exactly the same way that the letters ci would have been [ki] in antiquity, and later became [t∫i]. That's pretty clever, and I've pointed it out before when we were discussing what to call the capital of China, which underwent a similar shift. But I don't know about doing that officially.

text: :::As for t∫ vs. ∫, I cannot speak to that, having no knowledge of Burmese, but Andrew is not without experience in this field, en: agrees with him, so the pronunciation [t∫i] is likely at the very least an acceptable one, even if it's not the one you've usually heard personally. In any case, Tsii -is f. is probably to be rejected, given that it's got to be a personal invention of the author, and we normally avoid Latinizing names without precident. --Iustinus 04:13, 28 Februarii 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: ::::Re: "Well, keep in mind that we are not generally in the business of fixing Romanization systems."—But reality forces us to, as it did John Milton, who, when he had to write a poem about Guy Fawkes, made the surname Fauxus : "Cum simul in regem nuper satrapasque Britannos / Ausus es infandum, perfide Fauxe, nefas. . . ." (It wouldn't be surprising if that Latinization had been fixed before Milton got to it.) Milton wrote a poem for John Rouse, "Ad Ioannem Rousium." And he wrote an elegy for Thomas Young, "Elegia ad Thomam Iunium." So if Young is Iunius, it's not unreasonable to suppose that Aung, if a declinable form were wanted, would be Aunius. Hence presumably the East Asian strongman Mao Zedonius, and Commander Data's creator, Doctor Sunius (whose surname is itself the name of an important Chinese dynasty, the Sung/Sonq). It's reasonable to take what we've got and, when necessary or convenient, to extrapolate by a process of analogy. IacobusAmor 05:10, 28 Februarii 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: :::::Well, then we'd better fix Wolfgangus Amadeus Mozart (perhaps Vulfganius Amadeus Mosars?), and Christophorus Wren (Renius?), to say nothing of the (attested and attrocious) Guilelmus Oughtred! I mean, you know that by VP:TNP (which may not be policy, but more often than not is treated as such) we normally 1) Use the established Latin name, no matter how attrocious  2) failing that, don't Latinize the surname at all. The only reason there might be some doubt here is that we are dealing with a different alphabet. Still, it seems to me taht there is no good reason not to use her prefered romanization and just leave it at that. As for Young > Iunius, I don't think that was done because of any rule of Latin phonology (Longius, congius, spongius etc.), but rather because IVNIVS is a good, noble, classical name. It's more like someone named Kevin chosing to go by the Roman Calvinus rather than the Barbaric Cœmgenus, I'd say. --Iustinus 19:22, 1 Martii 2007 (UTC)

text: I hadn't come across Fauxus. Very nice. I don't feel like going too far down the -ius road though. After all, her name is based on that of Aung San, but he was a he and she's a she, so would you make her Aungius Sanius or Aungia Sania? Neither, in my view. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 09:34, 28 Februarii 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: :Funny that you should ask that. I happen to be channeling Cicero at the moment (he was attracted by the smell of the coffee), and he tells me that Aung San Suu Kyi, in his opinion, is merely a barbaric way of saying Ausania Succia. The doubling of cc, he points out, is required to make novices lengthen that syllable. There was static in the transmission, though, and he might have been saying Ausania Sussia (with a doubled ess), or even Ausania Sucsia. We must work on improving the clarity of these conversations. ::winkwink:: IacobusAmor 12:56, 28 Februarii 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: ::Ah yes, caffeine adiction was Cicero's secret shame! ;) --Iustinus 19:22, 1 Martii 2007 (UTC)
Convincor ab Iustino: scribamus Aung San Suu Ciis, is (f) cum sit variatio phonetica--Marc mage 09:57, 28 Februarii 2007 (UTC)

text: Superbus sum, te convicto. Non autem scio num a me ispe convincar! --Iustinus 19:22, 1 Martii 2007 (UTC)
I think now that we should move to Aung San Suu Kyi, the spelling she uses herself. Although there is a modern scientific transliteration of Burmese, it is rebarbative and not in everyday use, certainly not for people's names. I liked Aung San Suu Cii but it was merely a best guess: we should try not to guess at all :) Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 17:55, 14 Novembris 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Names