Plé:Nikita Khrushchev

Fuaimnítear an chéad litir mar CH na Gaeilge, agus í á cur in iúl le Kh- sa traslitriú Béarla. Mar sin, ba chóir "Khrushchev" a úsáid. Panu Petteri Höglund 15:26, 15 Lúnasa 2007 (UTC)[reply]

English name taking precedence?[athraigh foinse]

(In English for clarity)

Hi. Firstly, let me state that I also sometimes have issues when we artificially "Gallicise" names in this project.

However, in this case, EVERY Wikipedia article (apart from RU) has had to "translate" Hrushev’s name – because the alphabets are different.

The man’s name (as he used himself, and as appears on his grave stone), was "Ники́та Серге́евич Хрущёв". You can’t render that in the Irish alphabet. And so, "translation" is required.

As with EVERY OTHER language, a "translation" of the name has occured to accommodate local alphabets, spelling, and pronunciation. Consider the Interwiki’s for the subject. ("Exhibit A" as below.) They are all unique to local requirements. And yet, for some reason, a (unilateral) decision was taken that the Irish Wikipedia needed to follow the English spelling.

What’s wrong with "Nicíte Cruistsiof"? Why is it any different to the (say) the Hungarian Wikipedia using the spelling: "Nyikita Hruscsov"? Why follow the English spelling here? And not anywhere else?

With regard to the other "reasons" given for the change:

The first reason noted for the change was: "ní gá aistriú go dtí an litriú Gaeilge". As above, yes there was. It was however a translation from the Russian. Not a translation from the English. Why "translate" to the English here?

The second reason given was: "ní bhíonn aon úsáid leis". Yes, there is. See acmhainn.ie.

And the final "reason" given was: "cuireann sé daoine amú". If the issue here is "confusion", or that people won’t know what to link on, then a redirect from the English Spelling solves that problem. And this is now done.

I would therefore like to revert the changes based on these grounds. (And the fact that the move resulted in a broken double redirect.)

However, I would welcome some discussion to gain concensus before doing so.

PLEASE discuss these kind of renames before making changes unilaterally. GRMA. Guliolopez 16:20, 15 Lúnasa 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Name in other langs (Exhibit A)[athraigh foinse]

Khrushchev's name: a note from somebody who is fluent in Irish and Russian[athraigh foinse]

The problem with Gaelicizing Russian names in Irish is, that there is as yet no official Irish system for transliterating them systematically. Acmhainn.ie's suggestion can in my honest opinion be in this particular instance be contested, because a) it is not a particularly good idea to transliterate Russian names in a piecemeal way, without using an internally consistent system which could be applied to every Russian name, and b) it is in itself not a very good or a particularly accurate transcription - above all, the initial C- masks the fact that the first letter in the Russian name Хрущёв is pronounced as a German ach sound, i.e. as an Irish broad ch. This is a very serious problem, because K and this sound are very distinct phonemes in Russian and even in Irish (at least as it is spoken by most native speakers).

Myself, I am terribly unhappy with using English transcriptions such as "Khrushchev" in Irish. However, I tend to think that as far as there is no official or systematic set of rules for transliterating Russian into Irish, the English transcription is the best alternative - "best" in the sense of "least bad". Most Irish speakers, natives included, can read English, and the English transcription gives them the best clue to how Russians would pronounce it. In my experience, native speakers, when seeing a foreign word or name, will read it out as if it were English.

There are scientific, non-national transliteration systems for Russian which follow the overall principles for writing Slavic languages in the Latin alphabet, and they would be my best bet, if the English transliteration is to be avoided for principal reasons. One such system would render Khrushchev's name as Nikita Sergejevič Xruščëv. Accurate as it is, I am afraid it looks rather intimidating for an Irish speaker not conversant in the Slavic languages.Panu Petteri Höglund 20:38, 15 Lúnasa 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And while we are at it: "Khrushchev" is accurate, but "Krushchev" with a K is not accurate by any system, because Kh- stands for a German/Gaeltacht broad Ch sound, but K for a K sound. Panu Petteri Höglund 20:40, 15 Lúnasa 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ceart go leor a Phanu. GRMA. I dtacaíocht le do chuid moladh, I'd happily advocate a transliteration to "Khrushchev". But what of his first name? Nikita, nó Nicíte, nó Nikíta, nó (some other combination)? :) Guliolopez 22:59, 15 Lúnasa 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Now that I am back to Finland from Tír Chonaill, I can answer this: the correct form is Nikita, and as the T is hard, or broad, "Nicíota" would be the best approximation if we were to transliterate his name into Irish.Panu Petteri Höglund 20:44, 25 Lúnasa 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A Ghulio, ceapaim gur dhein na Rúisigh iarracht cúpla bliain ó shin ar chaighdeán litriú na Rúisise sa chló Rómhánach a chruthú agus, dár leis an gcaighdeán sin, gurb é mar Nikita Hruščev a scríobhtar ainm iar-ardrúnaí an Aontais Sóibhéadaigh. Sean an Scuab 14:48, 16 Lúnasa 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ceart go leor. I have renamed based on the discussion above (and similar transliteration in other langs) using Khrushchev over Krushchev. IE: Broader/softer/throatier "Kh" over hard/short "K". Anois - faoina chéad ainm. Cad a cheapaimid faoi "ath-ainmneach" go "Nicíota Khrushchev". De bharr an moladh a bhí ag Panu? Is such a rename kosher? Or are there any "original research" issues? Guliolopez 23:24, 25 Lúnasa 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Nicíota Khrushchev" would be a combination of Irish + English. I would reommend that if the English transliteration does not satisfy people, then we will find out about different scientific transliteration schemes - such as the one mentioned by Seán an Scuab - and vote for the one which we will prefer. Personally, I would prefer a scheme that uses Ch for the Cyrillic X, though, rather than X or H.Panu Petteri Höglund 15:26, 26 Lúnasa 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Panu, you might know a bit more about this than anyone else. To the best of my recollection, the attempt at standardising Russian spelling in the Roman script took place some time during the early 1990s and it may also have been picked up by the Bulgarians, Belarussians and Ukrainians. (E.g. the city that was always spelled "Grodno" became "Hrodno" or Bulgarian soccer player "Christo Stoichkov" became "Hristo Stoichkov" etc.) Sean an Scuab 22:10, 26 Lúnasa 2007 (UTC)[reply]