Disputatio:Nanguinata

message: The pronounciation in Japanese is na-gi-na-ta. Gi as in give. The 'gui' spelling must have mistakenly been borrowed from Spanish orthography. Please either make the appropriate changes or allow me to do so.Jondel
replies: text: Okay,

text: * Shall we respell "Artaxerxes" because the pronunciation in Persian is Ar-tax-ša-çā, and the "erx" must have been mistakenly borrowed from Greek orthography?

text: * There are three sources in the article showing that 'nanguinata' was used in Latin text, was declined as a Latin word, and was so used over a period of (at least) sixty years—is there have a source for 'naginata' as a Latin word?

text: * It is true that the Latin orthography of Japanese is influenced by the Spaniards who first wrote it down—but these are not 'mistakes'; just like everyone else in Europe, they wrote new words in Latin more or less the way they pronounced them, according to their national pronunciations, and 'nanguinata' (unlike, say, the fourth source's 'nanganetta') is entirely accurate under that system, because:

text: * Saying "The pronounciation in Japanese is na-gi-na-ta" is not even entirely correct — /g/ in common dialects of Japanese is very clearly pronounced [ŋ] as in 'sing' between vowels (en:Japanese_phonology#endnote_4a concurs with what I've heard), and the transcriptions of the Latin writers, not just in this word but across the language, show that this pronunciation was already being heard five hundred years ago.    —Mucius Tever 14:03, 27 Decembris 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: :Sorry, I hadn't read to the end of the page. [I carelessly moved too fast, and have now moved back again.] Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:17, 27 Decembris 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: ::No worries.  —Mucius Tever 14:21, 27 Decembris 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: :::Nevertheless, Jondel is rightly reminding us that Cicero redivivus will be pronouncing the Latin in five syllables: nan-gu-i-na-ta. The letter u (well, tempore reipublicae Romanae spelled V) usually indicates the sound of /u/. IacobusAmor 14:29, 27 Decembris 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: ::::Cicero redivivus would have a lot of trouble with Japanese in general in any case, I'm afraid, from /ʃ/ and /ʒ/ and short /z/ to /j/ after consonants... I seem to remember this being in a previous discussion as well, but can't recall where.  It would certainly still be a four-syllable nan-gui-na-ta though, as -ngu- before a vowel normally indicates a consonantal u (as in anguilla, bilinguis, pinguitudo, etc.) —Mucius Tever 17:42, 27 Decembris 2011 (UTC)

text: :Emendation -- a bit of brushing up on the Late Middle Japanese the word would have been borrowed from suggests that the 'ng' actually represents a prenasalized g (/ⁿg/), not a velar nasal. —Mucius Tever 18:21, 27 Decembris 2011 (UTC)
Pronuntatio iaponice est na-gi-na-ta. Gi ut 'gigne'. Mihi videtur orthographia 'gui' ex modo hispanice errato facta est. Amabo te emenda an licet me emendem proprie.Jondel

text: Hi Mucius, There is no need to get worked up. Im not asking that Artaxerxes be respelt as Artaxsasa or Iesus be respelt back to Jesus. Im sorry I miss out the page bottom too. If you insist on a spelling which from the 16th century then go ahead.  They didn't have the internet back then. Why not get things straight with available tools now? Confirmation at the Japanese interwiki is just one click away.  Practically this is the only wiki that insists on using this spelling. Even the spanish wiki got the spelling right. The links of the 'three source links don't work. I work as a Japanese translator by the way and lived in Japan. I don't think the Japanese nanguinata. But I will abide whatever is decided. --Jondel 16:37, 27 Decembris 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: :Artaxerxes was only an analogy.  I don't take it personally, just think that if there are changes they should have reasons, and in this case none of the reasons seemed to hold up.  I don't think the Japanese interwiki will help.  Nobody is denying that the Japanese is "なぎなた" or "薙刀".  If we were to ask what the Japanese word is, of course we would say "naginata".  But that doesn't make the Latin word wrong.  Yes, the other wikis don't use that spelling because the other wikis aren't writing in Latin, just as other wikis write about Cluj-Napoca where we have Claudiopolis, or as our article is at labda while others have lambda with an m and the Greeks have abandoned the beta altogether.

text: :I'm not sure what badness is being implied by saying the spelling is from the 16th century—you can't mean because it is too old, as most unobjectionable Latin words have older spellings, and you can't mean because it is too new, because the proposed Latin form naginata is newer.

text: :As for the sources, seven-year-old links don't tend to keep very well--I'll see if I can update them. —Mucius Tever 17:42, 27 Decembris 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: ::Links updated.  —Mucius Tever 18:07, 27 Decembris 2011 (UTC)
Sorry, I guess the 16th century source, any latin source, would indeed be the best reference for the article and wikipedia. It is very good that you found a source for this article. The point is that things of that century weren't very accurate and at best, approximations of what is heard and understood, and well, is too old(?), considering that naginatas still and are a part of modern Japanese life in sports. (Are you going to rely on medicinal knowledge in this century?) It is soo hard to fit modern concepts into ancient thinking. I would really, rather use natio than civitates(a state or province), or civilizatio instead of humanus cultus. I'm sure, in the 16th century, j was prevalent for i and v for u as Iacobus mentions. Those things are being corrected now. We have to balance between old world terms and modern concepts.
The pronounciation can be correct as na-ngui-gata,however....
To most Japanese(ears), the European/Western pronounciation of Latin and RATEN sound the same,but using RATEN would create confusion. Therefore refer to the source. If, when the Japanese say na'ngi'nata, they are really are trying to say naginata. In the same way, kempo should be kenpo, jujitsu is really jujutsu. We are writing it here as nanguinata for the sake of the source (and because maybe westerners seem to hear it pronounced that way). It would best to refer to the 'as origin-as-possible 'source. In this case the transliteration of Hiragana. If this was reversed, using the Latin source  nanguinata could potentialy create confusion, when dealing with Japanese. Say or pronounce kenpo, jujutsu, naginata,sa-ke(not sake as in 'take'), etc when speaking with japanese. But I got your point and am glad that you are aware of the Japanese as "naginata". The current form of the article, with naginata, placed by Andrew, is great.Because both old and new terms are indicated.
I guess I'm happy a lot of things still weren't written in the 16th century or we would be stuck having to use them as references.
I'm enjoying trying to read the links you fixed but I admit it is still far from my level of latin. Veniam vestra.--Jondel 09:29, 28 Decembris 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Title, pronuntiation and spelling. Mutemus ad "Naginata"