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