Me, a naive fool: Yeah, standardising the romanisation of names for @UnwobblingPivot won't be too hard. I'll mostly be converting between Pinyin, Wade-Giles, and whatever the hell Legge was doing, right?
Reality: No two translators have ever used the same Romanisation system.
-
Show this thread
-
Legge: Just did whatever Waley: Just did whatever Pound: Just did whatever Lau: Maybe Wade-Giles? Chan: *Modified* Wade-Giles Leys: Pinyin Huang: Amazingly, also Pinyin
1 reply 0 retweets 5 likesShow this thread -
So, I plan on mostly using Waley and Chan going forward, and they both use Wade-Giles (mostly), so that's what I'm going with. It took some effort to find a chart for converting Legge's scheme to WG, but I found something I think I can use.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @CheshireOcelot
The problem with all these Romanization schemes is Beijing mandarin wasn't considered standard until like 1949
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes
The first colleges for British administrators taught Cantonese and Minnan... earlier Romanization makes much more sense from that POV
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.