12-31-2025, 12:59 AM
I received a new proposal regarding the localization for Chinese (Mandarin), so I’ll share it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hVrpHIak...R4YYklkXiQ
[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…?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hVrpHIak...R4YYklkXiQ
[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…?