Help Wikitravel grow by contributing to an article! Learn how.
New users, please see Help or go to the Pub to ask questions.

Difference between revisions of "User:Keithonearth"

From Wikitravel
Jump to: navigation, search
Line 1: Line 1:
 
I was a wikitravel user who, although initially excited about the fact that a wiki based travel guide exists, grew increasingly unhappy with Even and Maj's management style.  The sell off to IB and the de facto refusal to allow SQL Data Dumps was the final straw.  I'm no longer an active contributor, but I still hope for change, particularly SQL DB Dumps.
 
I was a wikitravel user who, although initially excited about the fact that a wiki based travel guide exists, grew increasingly unhappy with Even and Maj's management style.  The sell off to IB and the de facto refusal to allow SQL Data Dumps was the final straw.  I'm no longer an active contributor, but I still hope for change, particularly SQL DB Dumps.
  
Dear Keith: as for your question about the "Cohong" being translated as 公行, it is not a transliteration of the Chinese. That would be gōngháng. Cohong is a loan word borrowed and bastardized in pronunciation from the Chinese - most likely based on the Cantonese pronunciation. The Chinese characters are original, and in keeping with how history books would refer to the trade monopoly, we are using the loan word. This is akin to the fact that we still refer to Confucius as Confucius instead of "Kǒngzǐ." Most history and scholarly tomes on China today use the modern pinyin romanization system except where certain terms are generally widely known in the West and accepted - like Confucius, Cohong, Hong Kong (Xiānggǎng), Kuomintang (Guómíndǎng), etc. These are left in their old forms. Hope this helps! Cheers!
+
Dear Keith: as for your question about the "Cohong" being translated as 公行, it is not a transliteration of the Chinese. That would be gōngháng. Cohong is a loan word borrowed and bastardized in pronunciation from the Chinese - most likely based on the Cantonese pronunciation. The Chinese characters are original, and in keeping with how history books would refer to the trade monopoly, we are using the loan word. This is akin to the fact that we still refer to Confucius as Confucius instead of "Kǒngzǐ." Most history and scholarly tomes on China today use the modern pinyin romanization system except where certain terms are generally widely known in the West and accepted - like Confucius, Cohong, Hong Kong (Xiānggǎng), Kuomintang (Guómíndǎng), etc. These are left in their old forms. Hope this helps! Cheers! [[User:Guiyang laoshi|Guiyang laoshi]] 10:45, 11 October 2010 (EDT)

Revision as of 14:49, 11 October 2010

I was a wikitravel user who, although initially excited about the fact that a wiki based travel guide exists, grew increasingly unhappy with Even and Maj's management style. The sell off to IB and the de facto refusal to allow SQL Data Dumps was the final straw. I'm no longer an active contributor, but I still hope for change, particularly SQL DB Dumps.

Dear Keith: as for your question about the "Cohong" being translated as 公行, it is not a transliteration of the Chinese. That would be gōngháng. Cohong is a loan word borrowed and bastardized in pronunciation from the Chinese - most likely based on the Cantonese pronunciation. The Chinese characters are original, and in keeping with how history books would refer to the trade monopoly, we are using the loan word. This is akin to the fact that we still refer to Confucius as Confucius instead of "Kǒngzǐ." Most history and scholarly tomes on China today use the modern pinyin romanization system except where certain terms are generally widely known in the West and accepted - like Confucius, Cohong, Hong Kong (Xiānggǎng), Kuomintang (Guómíndǎng), etc. These are left in their old forms. Hope this helps! Cheers! Guiyang laoshi 10:45, 11 October 2010 (EDT)

Variants

Actions

Destination Docents

In other languages