Newsgroups: sci.lang
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!nntp.club.cc.cmu.edu!eecs-usenet-02.mit.edu!news.kei.com!nntprelay.mathworks.com!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed.direct.ca!feed.nntp.acc.ca!torfree!cu216
From: cu216@torfree.net (Allen Kichiji Kabayama)
Subject: Re: Cantonese Romanization
Message-ID: <ED5Et4.BnJ.0.queen@torfree.net>
Organization: Toronto Free-Net
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
References: <ECqoJH.M8w.0.queen@torfree.net> <ECyv1C.9pB@midway.uchicago.edu> <slrn5s370j.7l.tc31@fandora.resnet.cornell.edu>
Date: Fri, 11 Jul 1997 09:39:04 GMT
Lines: 26

Thomas Chan (tc31@cornell.edu) wrote:
: On Mon, 7 Jul 1997 20:46:24 GMT,
: Daniel von Brighoff <deb5@midway.uchicago.edu> wrote:
: >In article <ECqoJH.M8w.0.queen@torfree.net>,
: >Allen Kichiji Kabayama <cu216@torfree.net> wrote:
: >>Can somebody tell me what some of the common romanization schemes for 
: >>Cantonese are?  Is there one that could be considered in more common
: >>use than the others?  That is, more of a standard?
: >
: >The ones I'm familiar with are:
: >*Yale
: >*Meyer-Wempe
: >*Sydney Lau
: >*[at least one other whose name escapes me]

: Barrett-Chao (sp?)
: LSHK (Linguistic Society of Hong Kong)
Which is the evil romanization scheme that uses 'foot' where Yale uses 
'fut', 'ngoh' for 'ngo' and 'chuen' for 'chyun'?

Thanks,

--Allen.
-- 
---
Allen K. Kabayama                        E: cu216@freenet.toronto.on.ca
