Wiktionary talk:Bengali transliteration

This page till now has been created and modified by a single user user:Opiaterein. I am not sure what standards he followed to mark the trasliteration for Bengali (Bangla) script. But they vary significantly from International (ISO 15919) and Indian national standard (National Library at Kolkata romanization).

Following is the discussion in User talk:Opiaterein, Talk:অনেক and User talk:Prometheus.pyrphoros page till now.

In User talk:Prometheus.pyrphoros

Please don't use a for অ etc. I understand that this makes it more similar to other Indo-Aryan languages, but Bengali isn't Hindi and to use the same system for all these languages would be misleading and potentially confusing. See Wiktionary:Bengali transliteration to see how we do Bengali. — opiaterein — 13:57, 26 August 2010 (UTC)Reply

For transliteration of অনেক, I followed National Library at Kolkata romanization which is a standard for all Indic languages. I understand very well that Bengali অ does not sound exactly same as Hindi अ. But they are both same alphabet. Also as you know transliteration is not same as pronunciation. As mentioned in the article transliteration, "From an information-theoretical point of view, transliteration is a mapping from one system of writing into another, word by word, or ideally letter by letter. Transliteration attempts to use a one-to-one correspondence and be exact, so that an informed reader should be able to reconstruct the original spelling of unknown transliterated words."

So both and should be transliterated as anek not ônek (অনেক) for Bengali and anek (अनेक) for Hindi, because even though they sound little different, they have the same spelling. Prometheus.pyrphoros 18:00, 28 August 2010 (UTC)Reply

In User talk:Opiaterein

We are not a library in Kalkuta. Devanagari is not Bangla-lipi. Bengali is not Hindi or Kashmiri or Gujarati and to treat them all the same way might work for a comparative work, but wiktionary is not a comparative dictionary. I'm more than happy to ban you if you'd rather try to make wiktionary yours than follow the suggestions of experienced editors, which would be a terrible shame since we have no Bengali editors. — opiaterein — 18:09, 28 August 2010 (UTC)Reply

In Talk:অনেক

1. "But they are both same alphabet" - They are very clearly... NOT the same "alphabet".
2. The "National Library at Kolkata" doesn't tell us how to do things. We're not a comparative dictionary, so "for all Indic languages" doesn't make an exceptional amount of difference.
3. RVd — opiaterein — 18:18, 28 August 2010 (UTC)Reply

In User talk:Opiaterein

1. It's not just a library in Kolkata. It's the largest one in India, and national repository.
2. Misspelling the Kolkata to Kalkuta (also the meaning in Hindi becomes ofensive) clearly shows disrespect.
3. A change with proper justfication, should be open to discussion, rather threatening with Ban!
4. cf. Indic alphabet, it shows that both alphabets are same
5. Moreover.. the point in discussion is transliteration and not pronunciation.. so what is the point in differentiating?
6. If you are open to dicsussion.. why not take it to a proper page and lets get a concensus.
7. Wikitionary Bengali is still pretty much growing and all the standards set already need not to be accurate.

Prometheus.pyrphoros 11:11, 29 August 2010 (UTC)Reply

You don't even follow your own transliteration rules. কলকাতা by your system would be Kalakātā, since transliteration is about the letters and not the pronunciations. অনেক wouldn't be the anek that you keep changing it to, but anēka (notice the fact that there's no ্ at the end. and "e" is for Dravidian ಎ.) So clearly you're not following your own rules, and if you keep changing Bengali transliterations to pan-Indian nonsense, I'm unfortunately going to have to ban you for a short time. I have more important things to do than argue something so nonsensical. Now if you have a real interest in editing here, let me know so I can point you to something of consequence. — opiaterein — 14:23, 29 August 2010 (UTC)Reply

I am not really trying to go into a edit war here! But KOLKATA (formarly Calcutta) is the official name of the city, not transliteration. I am not understanding why you are trying to pick up a fight here. I have already opened a discussion page in Wiktionary_talk:Bengali_transliteration, request you to give your input there instead of making treats to ban me in every second sentence. That you don't even recognize the official name of capital of West Bengal and hub of Bengali culture and literature clearly shows your level of knowledge of Bengal and Bengali. If you are really interested to help, I would suggest take inputs from native speakers of the language, and do not set some arbitrary standard of your own. BTW, I see that WT:Bengali transliteration page is solely created by you, just 15 days ago and you admit that you only have basic knowledge of Bengali.

Yes I am interested, and you can help me to start, even though I dont agree with you on transliteration part. Prometheus.pyrphoros 15:12, 29 August 2010 (UTC)Reply

I based Wiktionary:Bengali transliteration on Wikipedia's transliteration, phonology, input from native speakers who are more interested in Bengali as a solitary, independent unit than as an appendix to Hindi and other Indo-Aryan languages, common usage and common sense. Normal people online do not use your system to communicate in Bengali in the latin alphabet online. You calling Calcutta "the hub of Bengali culture and literature" seems to indicate a disrespect for Bangladesh, which I believe has more Bengali speakers than West Bengal. You indicate that the library of calcutta's system is the "Indian national standard" - well, Bangladesh doesn't fall under the "Indian national standard". You are doing a disservice to users looking for Bengali if you do not include IPA with transliterations as they will likely be confused about pronunciation - trying to pronounce সাহায্য as "sahayya". If you don't know IPA and can't contribute accurate pronunciations, then transliteration is the only option to show how to say words. If you want to know how to read it - then learn how to read it.

Helping you to start is rather funny. Tell me, what is your plan for making templates to show forms of Bengali nouns and verbs? Do you think it's possible someone has already done this? — opiaterein — 15:34, 29 August 2010 (UTC)Reply

1. No disrespect meant for Bangladeshi people. It's ridiculous to even think like that! And I wrote Kolkata,(a) hub not Kolkata, the hub.
2. I did not mention only National standard for India, but International standard also (ISO 15919), both of which differ from the current rule that you have mentioned.
3. Normal people what type in online communication does not constitute standard.
4. I agree with you that IPA needs to be included, but arbitrary transliteration doesn't solve that problem. I would try to include IPA in Bengali words.
5. A lot of people has put a lot of effort to form some standards for transliteration, why to try to redo things already done, and deviate from a International standard?
6. People need to know either IPA or the rule you are following for transliteration, in both cases they have to go through the rules. Can't just interpret on their own. How do you differentiate between 'o', 'O', 'ô' or 'ō' if you don't have some example, some rule. So your justification for creating own transliteration does not hold true.
7. Why don't we take this discussion to another page in Wikitionary namespace, rather than discussing in userspace, that will help any future editors, and as I said I want to put effort to improve Bengali entries, as you also do. Prometheus.pyrphoros 17:04, 29 August 2010 (UTC)Reply

I don't think you realize that "standards" mean nothing to me if they are only practiced by linguistic elite. I've said your transliteration is a disservice to people who want to learn Bengali to actually communicate - not to write literature or work for the government. So I don't care what the Calcutta standard is, or what the international standard is... I absolutely refuse to use a transliteration for Bengali that was designed to fit around Hindi or Tamil so they could all use the same happy transliteration system - or one that only benefits comparative linguists. Using the transliteration systems that you describe would not benefit people communicating online in the least. — opiaterein — 17:15, 29 August 2010 (UTC)Reply

I definately realize that. But again and again it's coming to what I think and what you think. Don't you agree it should be put into a page for more people to discuss? And decide upon what the concensious (WP:CONS) there? That's the idea behind a 'Wiki' right? (WP:FIVE) Prometheus.pyrphoros 17:43, 29 August 2010 (UTC)Reply

Below is NLK transliteration.

I request other editor to participate in this discussion and give your opinion. Prometheus.pyrphoros 14:36, 29 August 2010 (UTC)Reply

My 1.5 cents: National Library at Kolkata romanization is not the only authority in transliteration/ romanization. As far as I remember, Bangla Academy, the main Bengali language standards and regulatory authority in Bangladesh, has their own standards as well. (though I can't point out a link to that or elaborate the rules). So, picking a regional scheme as THE standard is not preferable. I suggest that transliterations should include all the existing standards, not just a single regional one. --Ragib 18:37, 30 August 2010 (UTC)Reply

BTW: "anek" is ambiguous if you want to portray the pronunciation of the word. Any non-Bengali and non-South Asian person will probably pronounce it as "আনেক" rather than "অনেক". Hindi has a slight but distinct and longer অ sound which is not the same as the Bengali অ sound, which is shorter. If the transliteration is directed towards non-Bengali and non-South Asian people, then writing "Anek" will only cause them to pronounce it incorrectly ... i.e., rather than pronouncing the word the Bengali way, they will pronounce it in the Hindi way. No disrespect to the NLK ... but their romanization scheme does not represent the real spoken Bengali language by Bengali speakers. --Ragib 18:43, 30 August 2010 (UTC)Reply

1. "Transliteration of Indic scripts and how to use ISO 15919 </ br>
2. ISO 15919:2001

I would like to suggest two major changes in Wiktionary.

Firstly the transliteration of all Bengali place names and words to the wiki Bengali transliteration scheme to be implemented. By this it could mean to replace all current spelling with more phonemically accurate spellings like many other Dictionaries and Encyclopaedias do. Secondly I would like to suggest that the sounds জ -য & ঝ are distinguished when being transliterated as more dialects than not do in fact distinguish between them all.

জ- could be written as dz in English for numerous reasons: Firstly, it is a more accurate pronunciation of the letter in more dialects than not. Secondly, this character is used to represent the dental "Z" sound in other languages (IPA: /z̪/) because they sound very similar to native Bengali people as Bengali lacks its own /z̪/ sound.

য- could be written as j for the following reasons: Firstly, I am aware that the IPA for this character is the same for জ, however, (once again in more dialects than not) it is pronounced (and taught in many schools both in Bangladesh/India and overseas,) as an halfway between dz and ʒ

ঝ- could be written as either dzh or jh as it is used for both the aspirated forms of জ & য.

Please take these suggestions into consideration. I do not wish to set any new standards myself, I only wish to represent Bengali as it is mainly spoken.

Thank You 87.112.70.217Nadiim87.112.70.217 08:30, 11 October 2010 (UTC)Reply

Although it is obsolete like milk, I will Oppose such suggestion because জ‌ and য are pronounced exactly the same. Sbb1413 (he) (talk • contribs) 18:09, 15 January 2023 (UTC)Reply

I think the Bengali compound diacritic "্যা" should be transliterated as "ê" because it is used by ISO 15919 to transliterate the Marathi vowel "ॲ", which is pronounced like a in gap and Bengali renders the vowel with "্যা". --Sbb1413 (he) (talk • contribs) 18:02, 15 January 2023 (UTC)Reply

Since Bengali orthography do not have a nice 1-to-1 correspondence compared to Hindi (although the orthography is still better than English), I think we should distinguish between transliteration and transcription. I have created {{bn-IPA}} for transcription (although it needs some work, since I'm not too familiar to Lua) and therefore, we have to change our transliteration scheme to render the orthography better in the Latin alphabet. I have introduced জ় (bôrgīẏô jô with nuqta) to render the z-sound in loanwords, since it has been used as such in certain publications (most notably in Anandabazar Patrika). I have also made a distinction between long and short vowels, which is purely orthographical. Sbb1413 (he) (talk • contribs) 17:48, 11 February 2023 (UTC)Reply

@Sbb1413 I am not entirely sure if not differentiating between /o/ and /ɔ/ as inherent vowel is the way to go. You can say that there's the pronunciation section for that, and looking at it word-by-word that might work. But the thing is: what if those words are used on other pages, like in example sentences? You can't expect people to click on each word to see how it is actually pronounced.

I've been reading a bit about Hindi transliteration on Wikipedia, and here Aryaman^A says: "We aren't doing transliteration to begin with since all our IA langs have a transcription that includes schwa deletion. Transliteration is not useful for a reader (that's why the native script is given!), but a transcription is because it represents how a word is said in a language-suitable consistent manner." Which would mean that these so-called 'transliteration pages' should rather be called 'romanization pages'.

So what are your thoughts on this? Exarchus (talk) 22:40, 19 July 2023 (UTC)Reply