+- Exomusica ll The Musical Science Institute (https://exomusica.tachybunker.fr)
+-- Forum: LΛMPLIGHT - the Shasavic open world discussion (https://exomusica.tachybunker.fr/forumdisplay.php?fid=15)
+--- Forum: Notation - chordonyms & harmononyms (https://exomusica.tachybunker.fr/forumdisplay.php?fid=16)
+--- Thread: Discussing localization for harmononyms (/showthread.php?tid=9)
Discussing localization for harmononyms - l4mplight - 08-16-2025
Hi everyone,
I’m LΛMPLIGHT, the creator of harmononyms. Thanks to Tachy for kindly setting up this space, and I hope everyone will jump in to discuss reading/localizing them for different languages.
About harmononyms:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hVrpHIaktDM&list=PLUPfWiftqUrIy3dMXdcpaYpGt6vZAeW5a&index=6
![[Image: hqdefault.jpg]](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/hVrpHIaktDM/hqdefault.jpg)
In the video, I’ve put together some ideas — not precise transcriptions, but aiming for consistency and to avoid confusion in each language, such as:
- Chinese: I’ve chosen to transcribe standalone forms as ‘-ei/-ou’ and suffix forms as ‘-i/-u’. If we transcribe “Scy” as ‘xī’ to keep it close to its original sound, it results in “Chy” being ‘hī’, which isn’t a natural sound in Chinese, so this is the compromise I made.
- Korean: I avoided using some batchim that could cause confusion. For example, if “-p” became ‘ㅂ’, harmononyms like “ChypMy…” (힙미…) and “ChymiMy…” (힘미…) could sound identical due to nasalization. Also, “Mry” would normally be ‘므리’, but I chose ‘믈리’ to prevent confusing “ChymiLy…” (히므/리…) with “ChyMry…” (히/므리…). It’s nonstandard to transcribe “r” as double ‘ㄹ’, but it avoids ambiguity.
These are just ideas, so any other suggestions or feedback for any language are very welcome.
It’s difficult to maintain consistency in the target language if we try to transcribe everything exactly, and if we focus on consistency, transcription tends to be imperfect. I’d love for you, as native speakers, to discuss and find what feels natural in your language!
RE: Discussing localization for harmononyms - l4mplight - 08-17-2025
For languages that use the Latin alphabet, I think it’s better to focus on defining the pronunciation rather than changing the spelling, but this is not meant as a restriction.
RE: Discussing localization for harmononyms - l4mplight - 08-17-2025
(Discussing in English is preferable, but if you’re not fluent don’t worry about it.)
RE: Discussing localization for harmononyms - tachy_bunker - 08-17-2025
Sacha Cendra has told an idea about French localization for harmononyms: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hVrpHIaktDM&lc=UgzOha6taVqPUaSdBq94AaABAg
The main ideas are:
v -> u / o
r -> tr
u -> u /[a]
.rvu -> f.re
As this only applies up to 5D, I'd just specify that -ay stays the same.
RE: Discussing localization for harmononyms - QWERTY_MASTER - 08-18-2025
So you gave me a reason to not hangeulize the alveolar tap as ㄹ, and i think i have a solution(?)
According to your nomenclature and chord-naming, under no circumstances would Chymi appear before Ly. So ChymiLy (Impossible), ChyMry (히므리) and Chymri (히믈 or 히므르; I'm thinking of the latter to improve consistency) is how I'd do it.
If you have time, I'd also like you to feedback my take on hangeulization
My take on shasavic hangeulization - Google Sheets
RE: Discussing localization for harmononyms - l4mplight - 08-19-2025
(08-18-2025, 01:14 PM)QWERTY_MASTER Wrote: So you gave me a reason to not hangeulize the alveolar tap as ㄹ, and i think i have a solution(?)
According to your nomenclature and chord-naming, under no circumstances would Chymi appear before Ly. So ChymiLy (Impossible), ChyMry (히므리) and Chymri (히믈 or 히므르; I'm thinking of the latter to improve consistency) is how I'd do it.
If you have time, I'd also like you to feedback my take on hangeulization
My take on shasavic hangeulization - Google Sheets
Wow, thank you so much! The way you summarized it in the spreadsheet makes it really easy to understand.
Regarding “ChymiLy…”, my way of writing might not have been clear. I was referring to cases where a suffix is attached after it.
For example, “ChymiLyzi” (히므/리츠) vs. “ChyMryzi” (히/므리츠).
The former is {2D↑4D↑, 3D↑5D↑}, and the latter is {2D↑, 4D↑↑5D↑}.
I thought this could be resolved by using “ChymiLyzi” (히므/리츠) vs. “ChyMryzi” (히/믈리츠).
However, using a double ㄹ to transcribe R isn’t common, so I’m wondering if there’s another solution. For example, the issue above might be resolved by changing how Ly is transcribed (뤼? 을리?). Or, if you can distinguish them in Korean by pausing or intonation, you could simply separate them with a dot, like “히므.리츠”.
P.S.
It seems better to change the transcription for Ly. I found a problem even in my proposal in the video.
These end up being the same:
- ChydriLymi → 히들/리므
- ChyDrymi → 히/들리므
- ChydriLymi → 히들/뤼므 (히드르/뤼므)
- ChyDrymi → 히/드리므
RE: Discussing localization for harmononyms - flirora - 08-19-2025
For my constructed language Ŋarâþ Crîþ:
2D: −3 ðu šu fu a hi ši ði +3
3D: −2 sru su a li dri +2 (-srô -s _ -l -drî)
4D: −2 pru pu a mi mêri +2 (-prô -pô _ -mî -mêrî)
5D: −2 cru ču a þi þri +2 (-crô -c _ -þ -þrî)
RE: Discussing localization for harmononyms - l4mplight - 12-31-2025
I received a new proposal regarding the localization for Chinese (Mandarin), so I’ll share it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hVrpHIaktDM&lc=Ugy8XUq6nxPb6zItPI54AaABAg.AQzHELOEflNAR4YYklkXiQ
[Original]
もし接尾辞形は独立形から母音が弱化したものであれば、例えば次の提案はいかがでしょうか。
･ 独立形 ⟨-ī⟩ ⟨-ū⟩
･ 接尾辞形⟨-e⟩ ⟨-uo⟩ （軽声で発音されるため、実際の音価は[ə~ɤ]、[ʊə~ʊɔ]に近いと思います。）
こうすると、沙語の独立形としての/u/と、転写の接尾辞形としての/u/かを混同しにくくなると思います。
ちなみにご存知かもしれませんが、5次元⟨zi⟩の転写⟨ci⟩は、[t͡si] ではなく [t͡sɹ̩~t͡sɻ̩] を表記しますね。一段上昇(?)の転写⟨-ri⟩も同様です。中国語では[i]と[ɹ̩~ɻ̩]が音素/i/の相補分布になっているため、[t͡si]や[ri]という音節自体が存在しません。こちらの提案も解決できませんけど、原音との発音はかなり近いのでいいかな…？と思います。
[Translation (Adapted)]
If the suffix form is derived from the independent form through vowel reduction, how about the following proposal? For example:
- Independent form: ⟨-ī⟩ ⟨-ū⟩
- Suffix form: ⟨-e⟩ ⟨-uo⟩ (since these are pronounced in a neutral tone, the actual phonetic values are probably close to [ə~ɤ] and [ʊə~ʊɔ], respectively)
This way, the independent ending /u/ and the suffix ending /u/ in transcription are less likely to be confused.
By the way, you may already know, but the transcription ⟨ci⟩ for the 5D ⟨zi⟩ represents [t͡sɹ̩~t͡sɻ̩] rather than [t͡si]. The double ascent transcription ⟨-ri⟩ follows the same pattern. In Chinese, [i] and [ɹ̩~ɻ̩] are in complementary distribution for the phoneme /i/, so syllables like [t͡si] or [ri] do not actually exist. This suggestion doesn’t fully resolve that either, but the pronunciation is still quite close to the original, so it might be acceptable…?