GokoU

[linkdude20002001]

I've really only run into one standard system between all Japanese-speaking people I know. I mean, it just makes sense to have ゴクウ spelled out as "Gokuu" when being literal because it's "go", "ku", and "u" and nothing else. Nowhere in that word is there a "ko" or an "ou."

I've said this to Piccolo Daimaoh a million times, but I'll say it again. Son Gokou is a transliteration. Goku, Gokuu, Gokuh, Gokū, and Gokû are all romanizations, but not transliterations. Transliterations are when you change the spelling, but keep the pronunciation relatively the same. Cha-la Head-cha-la is a good example of this. Correctly romanized, it would be written Chara Hetchara or Chara Hechara or even Dyara Heddyara (Nihin-shiki romanization), but they're not transliterations.

[Kendamu]

I've really only run into one standard system between all Japanese-speaking people I know. I mean, it just makes sense to have ゴクウ spelled out as "Gokuu" when being literal because it's "go", "ku", and "u" and nothing else. Nowhere in that word is there a "ko" or an "ou."

I've said this to Piccolo Daimaoh a million times, but I'll say it again. Son Gokou is a transliteration. Goku, Gokuu, Gokuh, Gokū, and Gokû are all romanizations, but not transliterations. Transliterations are when you change the spelling, but keep the pronunciation relatively the same. Cha-la Head-cha-la is a good example of this. Correctly romanized, it would be written Chara Hetchara or Chara Hechara or even Dyara Heddyara (Nihin-shiki romanization), but they're not transliterations.

Yeah, but it was meant to be Cha-La Head Cha-La the way it's meant to be Dragonball and not Doragonbooru. If I look at it from an English or Japanese standpoint, "ou" doesn't come off as "uu" to me at all. It comes off as "ow" except for in words like "bayou." It may be a transliteration, but it kind of sucks as one because it's easy to mispronounce. Especially so since the word originates from a language where words written in Kana have pretty straightforward pronunciations after you learn a few simple rules.

[linkdude20002001]

Cha-la Head-cha-la isn't English, it's Japanese. The song is also written チャラ・ヘッチャラ (Chara Hetchara), with ヘッチャラ (hetchara) meaning "no worries". Cha-la Head-cha-la and Gokou are "English spellings" of Japanese words or names. Dragon Ball (ドラゴンボール) is an English word(s), so it's not really the same.

From an English standpoint, all I can see coming out of kou is an OO sound. 99% of the words that end in "ou" make an OO sound, so why would it be different just because this name comes from Japan?

And having to learn rules, be them simple and few as they may be, is the exact reason for writing things as "English words". Head-cha-la is easier for an English speaker to pronounce, and it sounds like hetchara, so that's why they would write it that way. No foreign language rules needed.

[Olivier Hague]

I've said this to Piccolo Daimaoh a million times, but I'll say it again. Son Gokou is a transliteration. Goku, Gokuu, Gokuh, Gokū, and Gokû are all romanizations, but not transliterations. Transliterations are when you change the spelling, but keep the pronunciation relatively the same. Cha-la Head-cha-la is a good example of this. Correctly romanized, it would be written Chara Hetchara or Chara Hechara or even Dyara Heddyara (Nihin-shiki romanization), but they're not transliterations.

No. No, no, no. ^^;

Transliteration = conversion of a text from one writing system to another
Ideally, it would be a one-to-one mapping, but in practice, things really aren't that simple: you end up with a whole bunch of different systems, and some of them aren't "strictly" transliteration in the sense that they kinda veer into transcription territory by taking the actual pronunciation into account (in fact, the word "transliteration" is sometimes used in a broader sense that encompasses both transliteration in the narrow sense and transcription).

Romanization (of Japanese, here) = application of the Latin alphabet to write the Japanese language
It may be systematic transliteration, transcription, a mix of the two (see above)... but it's not necessarily systematic (like that Wikipedia article I quoted earlier said, "there are many variations in romanization, used either for simplification, in error or confusion between different systems, or for deliberate stylistic reasons").

So when you transliterate Japanese into Latin alphabet, by definition, you're romanizing. On the other hand, a romanization will not necessarily be a transliteration.

"Piccolo Daimaoh", "Gokou", "Goku", "Gokuu", "Gokuh", "Gokū", "Gokû" and "Cha-la Head-cha-la" are all romanizations.
While it's naturally possible to comment on whether or not those romanizations appear to be based on existing transliteration/transcription systems, seem "intuitive" or "odd" to you, it makes very little sense to speak of them in terms of "correct" or "incorrect", as there is no "golden rule" for romanization of Japanese. Again, see above about non-standard romanization. Some examples were given on page 1, such as "Shirow" and "Leiji"; these things happen, and they're not necessarily mistakes.

it was meant to be Cha-La Head Cha-La the way it's meant to be Dragonball and not Doragonbooru.

Er... It's not the same thing, really.
The words "dragon" and "ball" are originally English words, and they were converted into kana.
The words "chara" and "hetchara" are originally Japanese words, and they were romanized in a creative (non-standard) manner.

EDIT: Beaten.

[linkdude20002001]

Okay, so I misunderstood the words "transliteration" and "romanization". Are there any words/terms that can be used to differentiate between a romanzation like Gokou and head-cha-la, and a romanization like Gokuu and hetchara?

[Olivier Hague]

Are there any words/terms that can be used to differentiate between a romanzation like Gokou and head-cha-la, and a romanization like Gokuu and hetchara?

If you want to be specific, the way I see it:

For "Gokou" and "head-cha-la", I think it's safe to call them "non-standard romanizations". I guess there's always the possibility of such romanization systems existing or having existed somewhere in the world (heh... you never know), but really, even if they did, they'd be so obscure...

For "Gokuu" and "hetchara", you could call them "transliterations" (at least in the broader sense, anyway; some transliteration nazis may disagree about the "tcha" part in "hetchara"...). "Gokuu" certainly is the closest you'll get to a "strict" transliteration (i.e. in the narrow sense) of the original name, as it's basically a one-to-one mapping of the kana (well, "one-to-two", for "go" and "ku", but you catch my drift).

[linkdude20002001]

Alright. Thank ya. It's all just so difficult to keep straight. Why so many terms? Lol.

[Piccolo Daimaoh]

Okay, so I misunderstood the words "transliteration" and "romanization". Are there any words/terms that can be used to differentiate between a romanzation like Gokou and head-cha-la, and a romanization like Gokuu and hetchara?

I'm thinking Anglicization, which according to Wikipedia "is the act of changing of spoken or written elements of another language into a more understandable English for an English speaker". I think this best describes what we're doing here, for example:

ツフル人 (Japanese) ------> Tsufurujin (Romanized) ------> Tsufrian (Anglicized)

"Tsufrian" is more understandable and pronouncable than "Tsufurujin", so it is an anglicization. It isn't an romanization or transliteration, since it was adapted from a word that was already in the Latin alphabet.

[linkdude20002001]

Ah, Anglicization. I like that. Finally a word to describe... Anglicization.
Thanks, Piccolo Daimaoh.

[Piccolo Daimaoh]

Ah, Anglicization. I like that. Finally a word to describe... Anglicization.
Thanks, Piccolo Daimaoh.

Don't mention it. Linguistics is one of my passions, actually.

[OutlawTorn]

ツフル人 (Japanese) ------> Tsufurujin (Romanized) ------> Tsufrian (Anglicized)/quote]

I'm basing my comment off of what I read at DBZ Uncensored a while back, so if I am blatantly in error, it's because I don't have much knowledge of Japanese beyond a few words.

Basically, the "Saiya" part of Saiyajin is a play off "yasai" the Japanese word for "vegetables" whereas "tsufuru" is a play off of the English word "fruits" which, basically, would be "furutsu" when transferred to Japanese. So... the above example would be an Anglicization of a Japanese version of an English word.

And having to learn rules, be them simple and few as they may be, is the exact reason for writing things as "English words". Head-cha-la is easier for an English speaker to pronounce, and it sounds like hetchara, so that's why they would write it that way. No foreign language rules needed.

That doesn't really make much sense, though. The song is credited as "Cha-la Head Cha-la" in the Japanese credits and there is no translation whatsoever for that particular part of the song. Seriously, if you watch the DBZ opening credits, with or without English subtitles, the lyrics are always displayed as "Cha-La Head Cha-La" so if it is just a non-standard way of spelling Japanese words, why aren't those lyrics translated? Case in point, it even remains as "Cha-La Head Cha-La" in the version with English lyrics. The available evidence strongly suggests it is the intended spelling and not just something to make it easier to pronounce for English speakers.

[linkdude20002001]

As you just said, Tsufuru is not the Japanese version of the English word fruits, it's a re-arrangement of the Japanese word for the English word fruits.

As for the Cha-la Head-cha-la subject, I present this picture of the opening credits.


Also, perhaps you should read Julien's translation notes. Lol.

[Olivier Hague]

Okay, so I misunderstood the words "transliteration" and "romanization". Are there any words/terms that can be used to differentiate between a romanzation like Gokou and head-cha-la, and a romanization like Gokuu and hetchara?

I'm thinking Anglicization, which according to Wikipedia "is the act of changing of spoken or written elements of another language into a more understandable English for an English speaker".

But that's assuming that was the intent. By calling it a "non-standard romanization", you're keeping other options open.

"Tsufrian" is more understandable and pronouncable than "Tsufurujin", so it is an anglicization.

You got that backwards: it's been anglicised to look/sound more like an English term. Just because a word is relatively easy to understand or pronounce for an English speaker, that doesn't necessarily mean it's an anglicisation.

It isn't an romanization or transliteration, since it was adapted from a word that was already in the Latin alphabet.

No, it's not a a transliteration nor even a romanization because you actually changed the word around by replacing the "-jin" with a "-ian" in order to make it look like an English term. The basis of the pun doesn't matter at all, here.

Linguistics is one of my passions, actually.

...

the above example would be an Anglicization of a Japanese version of an English word.

An anglicisation of a Japanese term that was actually a pun based on a word borrowed from English.

EDIT: Beaten again!

That doesn't really make much sense, though. The song is credited as "Cha-la Head Cha-la" in the Japanese credits and there is no translation whatsoever for that particular part of the song.

Because you can expect Japanese people to recognize Japanese language when they hear it, no matter how it's romanized? Why would they need a "translation"?

if it is just a non-standard way of spelling Japanese words

It is.

why aren't those lyrics translated?

If you're referring to an English translation, you'd have to ask the translator. Considering it's the title of the song, maybe he thought it'd be better to keep it as is?

The available evidence strongly suggests it is the intended spelling

Well... Er... Yeah? Chances are they spelled those words like that on purpose, sure...

and not just something to make it easier to pronounce for English speakers.

Who said their intent was to make it easier to pronounce for English speakers? The series wasn't exactly aimed at them...

[Piccolo Daimaoh]

You got that backwards: it's been anglicised to look/sound more like an English term. Just because a word is relatively easy to understand or pronounce for an English speaker, that doesn't necessarily mean it's an anglicisation.

But that's what an anglicization is, making a foreign word easier to pronounce and understand for a native English speaker. By taking "Tsufurujin" and "Saiyajin" and changing them into "Tsufrian" and "Saiyan", you've made them look more English --- you've anglicized them. Allow me to use another example:


リクーム (Japanese) -----> Rikuumu (Romanized) -----> Recoom (Anglicized)


By taking the romanization of リクーム (Rikuumu) and changing it into "Recoom", you've made his name look more English. To me, it looks like it could be an actual English word. What's easier to pronounce, "Rikuumu" or "Recoom"?

[Olivier Hague]

Just because a word is relatively easy to understand or pronounce for an English speaker, that doesn't necessarily mean it's an anglicisation.

But that's what an anglicization is, making a foreign word easier to pronounce and understand for a native English speaker.

I'm not saying otherwise. Read again. ^^;

By taking the romanization of リクーム (Rikuumu)

(that's just one possible romanization)

and changing it into "Recoom", you've made his name look more English.

If that was the intent, yes, it's an anglicisation.

[Piccolo Daimaoh]

If that was the intent, yes, it's an anglicisation.

It was, and that's what we do with many Dragon Ball character names.

[Olivier Hague]

If that was the intent, yes, it's an anglicisation.

It was

If you're talking about you deciding to spell the name like that, I guess you would know what your intent was, sure. ^^
If you're talking about Tôei deciding to spell the name like that, it's another matter...

[ChaojiShucaiRen]

I don't think any of the examples throughout this can necessarily be considered an anglicization of the original. It COULD be but just as Olivier Hague said before me, calling it an "non-standard romanization" leaves many more possiblities. Even if it was an anglicization, it doesn't necessarily make it any easier to pronounce that word CORRECTLY. Now I will say again, I don't know very much Japanese but I think this will work all the same if I use Chinese.

Example: Let's look at the name Hòu Xīn. A CORRECT anglicization of Hòu Xīn is actually Oseen! If you were to say Oseen in plain english you wouldn't even come close to pronouncing it correctly. It may sound similar if said fast enough but to a native speaker you would sound like a babbling idiot.

Like I said in my other post, I personally believe transliterating and other linquistic methods used are simply not useful enough in the real world bar maybe the english speaking countries.

I say you should start out with pīn​yīn or romaji or whatever phonetic language structure of the language at hand, to get a grasp of the phonetics on a more personal level and it will make learning and speaking that language that much easier.

Now I'm not saying that transliterations and anglicizations and all the other sorts don't have a place in this world, but they are getting quite dated.

In a world where it takes no more than a day to travel across it, and no more than a year to grasp the basics of any language; I think we can all agree that learning a language is the best route to take.