ⲡⲓⲣⲉϥϭⲓⲙⲱⲓⲧ `ⲛϫⲟⲙ[edit source]
How do you recommend writing Vladimir Putin's name? The article was initially using ⲃⲗⲁⲧⲓⲙⲓⲣ ⲡⲟⲩⲧⲓⲛ, however I prefer something like ϥⲗⲁⲧⲙⲓⲣ ⲡⲟⲑⲓⲛ instead. --ⲡⲓⲙⲟⲩⲓ (talk) 05:55, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
ϯⲙⲟⲕⲙⲉⲕ ⲣⲉⲛϥ ⲡⲉ ⲃⲗⲁⲧⲓⲙⲓⲣ ⲫⲟⲩⲑⲓⲛ ⲓⲉ ⲃⲗⲁⲧⲉⲙⲓⲣ ⲫⲟⲩⲑⲉⲛ. ⲙⲁⲣⲉⲛⲉⲣ ⲭⲣⲏⲥⲧⲁⲓ `ⲙⲙⲟϥ. --هاني القبطي
- I think the name should be written ⲃⲗⲁⲧⲓⲙⲓⲣ ⲃⲗⲁⲧⲓⲙⲓⲣⲟⲃⲓϭ ⲫⲟⲩⲑⲓⲛ. I know one could say now, the unstressed o in Russian is rather an ⲉ in Coptic. But not a single language written with an alphabet takes this into account. Even Arabic has فلاديميروفيتش.
@ⲡⲓⲙⲟⲩⲓ: I really don't know why you prefer ϥⲗⲁⲧⲙⲓⲣ ⲡⲟⲑⲓⲛ. Why ϥ, why without the secound ⲓ and why ⲟ?
- I try, if possible, to avoid using the ⲃ as there is much debate on its pronunciation (old vs new), that is just a personal preference. AFAIK, in the original Coptic pronunciation, ⲃ is pronounced as English B at the end of the word or if followed by a consonant (please correct me if I am wrong), otherwise it is pronounced as English W. Hence, I prefer to use ϥ instead of ⲃ. Regarding the ⲓ it is just typo from my side, I agree that there should be a second ⲓ. And, I do not have any problem with replacing the ⲟ with ⲟⲩ, it is the just the way I pronounced it in Arabic i.e., a short O sound. Finally, I still prefer the ⲑ instead of the ⲧ. --ⲡⲓⲙⲟⲩⲓ (talk) 20:01, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
- The ⲃ is, when it is not a b as in the cases you said, rather a v, then a w. But yeah, as the letter is followed by ⲗ, it is indeed not a perfect representation. I think it is as bad as ϥ in this case. So if you prefer, you can write ϥ. I don't have the impression that his name is pronunced in Arabic with a short o. Do you speak Arabic? Or which accent? If we want to write it like Arabs pronounce it, we should write ⲃⲉⲗⲁⲧⲓⲙⲓⲣ ⲡⲟⲩⲑⲓⲛ. Although I don't understand why you prefer Arabic here - because in a case like ⲟⲑⲁⲟⲩⲁ, you don't want to write it like Arabs pronounce it. --ⲁϩⲙⲉⲧ (talk) 8 September 2017
@هاني القبطي: ⲃⲗⲁⲧⲉⲙⲓⲣ ⲫⲟⲩⲑⲉⲛ could be a solution, but honestly, again as I said above, no language treats the two different i in Vladimir differently.
While it is a good idea to represent the pronunciation more or less acurately, it is for sure way to cumbersome to differanciate here between the two i. No language does this, not a single person in Egypt (both Arabic and those who try to use Coptic in every-day life) does it and i really don't think it is a good idea. If we are so strict, we couldn't even use ϭ for ч - and that would be ridiculous. Sometimes, it makes sense to look at the local pronunciation. For instance, a 'CH' in Latin script, depending on the language, can be ϣ, ϭ, ϧ or ⲭ. In such cases, we should make a distinction. But I don't want to write ⲭⲣϣϯⲁⲛⲟⲩ (or something like this) for Portuguese people with the name Cristiano only because in European Portuguese s in front of consonants is pronounced like ϣ and vowels are often reduced. Again, many languages just write ⲭⲣⲓⲥϯⲁⲛⲟ, or less common, ⲭⲣⲓϣϯⲁⲛⲟ. That was actually also the reason why I still prefer ⲟⲑⲁⲟⲩⲁ and not ⲟⲑⲟⲩⲁ (just came into my mind). Personal names or toponyms which don't have a Coptic name, should either be rendered in Coptic the same as the name is rendered in all other languages of the region (ottawa) or, probably not a good choice in the case of Ottawa, we create an entirely new one in Coptic (ⲓⲁⲣⲟ `ⲛⲓⲁⲛⲟⲩⲁⲣⲓⲟⲥ instead of ⲣⲓⲟ ⲧⲉ ϣⲁⲛⲏⲣⲟ in the case of Rio de Janeiro, although I prefer to keep the name ⲣⲓⲟ ⲧⲉ ϣⲁⲛⲏⲣⲟ). And I think, ϧⲓⲟⲩϫⲉϣⲁⲛⲏⲣⲟⲩ is NOT an acceptable variant of ⲣⲓⲟ ⲧⲉ ϣⲁⲛⲏⲣⲟ. Actually, the more I think about it, the more I think we should use ⲟⲑⲁⲟⲩⲁ instead of ⲟⲑⲟⲩⲁ. --ⲁϩⲙⲉⲧ (talk) 7 September 2017
- Just a suggestion: why can't we have two pronunciations in such case? why can't we type the second name between brackets beside the first appearance in the article? or even better, beside the two pronunciations include the IPA pronunciation? --ⲡⲓⲙⲟⲩⲓ (talk) 20:01, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
- I mean, in cases like ⲟⲑⲁⲟⲩⲁ - ⲟⲑⲟⲩⲁ it is not a big problem if there are two slightly different spellings. But if you think it further to the very extent, we would have to do that with every non-Coptic toponym. And I'm really against ϧⲓⲟⲩϫⲉϣⲁⲛⲏⲣⲟⲩ. Nobody pronounces it that way outside of Rio de Janeiro and those Brazilian places where the accent is like in Rio. And I just think it is ridiculous, because no Copt who tries to learn Coptic will, when he talks about cities like Washington or Ottawa or Rio de Janeiro or Novosibirsk, look at what is the native pronunciation of these places. He will, instead just take the common Arabic or "global" pronunciation. Would you really be rather for forms like ⲡⲟⲩⲧⲟⲫⲉϣⲧ instead of ⲡⲟⲩⲧⲁⲫⲉⲥⲧ?