Danny wrote:
Going over last night's work, I notice that
Angstrom has been redone to
include all the various diacretics. Is that common usage in English?
In this case, there is an offical standard for units of measurement:
no diacriticals, no capitalisation. (I fixed the latter.)
Oh, and Lir, I also noticed on your page that you refer
to Jesus Christ as
Yehoshua of Nazareth. A very cute attempt to go back to the Hebrew/Aramaic,
but there are so many mistakes in that transliteration, it really makes it
useless.
1. There is no "ho" in the name. Yehoshua is
Joshua, Yeshua is Jesus. In
fact, in Deuteronomy, Joshua's name was changed from Jesus--you are just
changing it back.
It's commonly taught in the US that "Yeshua" and "Yoshua"
are both abbreviations of "Yehoshua", and thus "Jesus" =
"Joshua".
Is this wrong?
2. You're forgetting the gutteral ayin after the
final a in Yeshua (though in
Hebrew/Aramaic writing it appears as if it would be before, the proper
pronunciation places it after).
This is an argument about which transliteration is best.
I'd say "Yehowshua`" to reflect the presence of the Vav,
while Lir left out the "w" as well as the "`" --
but you will see both methods of transliteration employed.
3. Nazareth is just so far off the mark, it's not
even worth explaining.
Yeah, clearly she's not trying to transliterate this.
Apparently she knows only half of the name in the original
and will change this to "Natsret" (IIRC?) once she learns it.
4. "Of" would "me" in Hebrew or
"de" in Aramaic, without distinguishing
between the different vowels (tzeireh and shewa).
And this she isn't even attempting to translate into the right language.
Clearly only a half-hearted attempt, but better than nothing.
We improve step by step.
In other words, here your "attempt at
accuracy" is just confused gibberish,
i.e., it is wrong. Stick to languages you know something about.
-- Toby