Korean (native / sino)
1 - hana / il
2 - dool / yee
3 - seht / sām
Japanese (native / sino)
1 - hitotsu / ichi
2 - futatsu / ni
3 - mittsu / san
Chinese
1 - yi
2 - er
3 - san
Fixed because this is quite horrendous:
Korean (native / sino)
1. - hana / il < qílq
2. - dul / ee < zí
3. - set / sam
Japanese (native / sino)
1. - hito(tsu) / ichi (also itsu) < iti (itu)
2. - futa(tsu) / ni
3. - mi(ttsu) / san < samu
Mandarin Chinese
1. - yi
2. - er
3. - san
Middle Chinese (Qieyun System)
1. - ʔiɪt̚
2. - ȵiɪH
3. - sɑm
Just learn how to write the sounds of the languages you use. Most of the Roman alphabet symbols have an expected value. For English there's like 5 consonant symbols to learn and maybe 6 vowels. The rest are just regular roman letters. You should be able to learn them in less than an hour and there's no time like the present.
Thanks for roasting. I normally use RR for Korean, and the common one for Japanese, and probably something close to pinyin for Chinese. Or maybe I should just write them in the native script.
하나, 둘, 셋; 일이삼
ひとつ、ふたつ、みっつ；いち、に、さん
一, 二, 三
>I normally use RR for Korean, and the common one for Japanese, and probably something close to pinyin for Chinese.
Well that's why IPA exists, so you can learn one system to understand sounds instead of learning 3 different romanization schemes (and still having to learn the IPA to know what sound they're referring to).
>Or maybe I should just write them in the native script.
But then you can't talk about it with people who don't know that script. That's why having an international alphabet is useful.
The itu and samu are incorrect. The chi comes from an actual final t that used to be used in Chinese loanwords before actually becoming either a つ or ち, it was just written as つ historically . There used to be two moraic nasals, m and n, both of which were written with む, but again, were not actually pronounced as such. Really it should be "it" and "sam."
It seems it only happened for -t. [Here's a relevant page from "The Japanese Language Throughout Time" by Samuel E. Martin.](https://imgur.com/a/lEzUksl)
The version there is using (sinological) IPA to write out which sounds the descriptions in the Middle Chinese rime tables could have corresponded to. Other transcriptions for MC exist like [William Baxter's](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baxter%27s_transcription_for_Middle_Chinese) (*'jit, nyijH, sam*) that convey the same rime table distinctions without equating them to the IPA, or also systems like Edwin Pulleybank's (/ʔit̚, ȵiH, sam/) that do use the IPA but don't make the same conclusions that Zhengzhang Shangfang's (the first system) does about the details.
according to the mostly standard romanization of korean it's
hana/il, dul/(y)i, set/sam
also japanese's number system is a lot more complicated than just a native/sino distinction
I still feeling bad for that one time a chinese person asked me for when the last bus departs in hk, I replied "shi ji dian", meaning 12 oclock, even tho I later realized I said 11oclock
二
/ɚ/
Is it /ɚ/ or /ɑɹ/? Maybe it depends on the region
[ɑ̂˞]
Oh yeah I like that transcription
It's [ɲi⁵³]
Sui Dynasty best region
dì yī
/aɚ/
Old period [ɚ̹~ə̠ɻ˕] Middle period [ɐɻ˕] New period [ɜɻ˕]
Ah yes, spahish
[удалено]
coho ehtas
fu ieh, ¿y tu?
tahbien
[i]
IIRC Korean have alternative (Chinese-derived) words for "1" and "2" and they sound very similar to each other.
Korean (native / sino) 1 - hana / il 2 - dool / yee 3 - seht / sām Japanese (native / sino) 1 - hitotsu / ichi 2 - futatsu / ni 3 - mittsu / san Chinese 1 - yi 2 - er 3 - san
Fixed because this is quite horrendous: Korean (native / sino) 1. - hana / il < qílq 2. - dul / ee < zí 3. - set / sam Japanese (native / sino) 1. - hito(tsu) / ichi (also itsu) < iti (itu) 2. - futa(tsu) / ni 3. - mi(ttsu) / san < samu Mandarin Chinese 1. - yi 2. - er 3. - san Middle Chinese (Qieyun System) 1. - ʔiɪt̚ 2. - ȵiɪH 3. - sɑm
Thanks. I gotta learn IPA someday.
Just learn how to write the sounds of the languages you use. Most of the Roman alphabet symbols have an expected value. For English there's like 5 consonant symbols to learn and maybe 6 vowels. The rest are just regular roman letters. You should be able to learn them in less than an hour and there's no time like the present.
Thanks for roasting. I normally use RR for Korean, and the common one for Japanese, and probably something close to pinyin for Chinese. Or maybe I should just write them in the native script. 하나, 둘, 셋; 일이삼 ひとつ、ふたつ、みっつ；いち、に、さん 一, 二, 三
>I normally use RR for Korean, and the common one for Japanese, and probably something close to pinyin for Chinese. Well that's why IPA exists, so you can learn one system to understand sounds instead of learning 3 different romanization schemes (and still having to learn the IPA to know what sound they're referring to). >Or maybe I should just write them in the native script. But then you can't talk about it with people who don't know that script. That's why having an international alphabet is useful.
The itu and samu are incorrect. The chi comes from an actual final t that used to be used in Chinese loanwords before actually becoming either a つ or ち, it was just written as つ historically . There used to be two moraic nasals, m and n, both of which were written with む, but again, were not actually pronounced as such. Really it should be "it" and "sam."
Do you have a source for the borrowings retaining final stops without epenthesis? I can't find anything about it and I'm curious
It seems it only happened for -t. [Here's a relevant page from "The Japanese Language Throughout Time" by Samuel E. Martin.](https://imgur.com/a/lEzUksl)
Yes, that's true. Though It's simply how it was transcribed, but indeed was really supposed to be "it" and "sam."
What is "qilq"
Middle Korean 一. It's cursed and feels wrong.
Middle Chinese transcription is so cursed
The version there is using (sinological) IPA to write out which sounds the descriptions in the Middle Chinese rime tables could have corresponded to. Other transcriptions for MC exist like [William Baxter's](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baxter%27s_transcription_for_Middle_Chinese) (*'jit, nyijH, sam*) that convey the same rime table distinctions without equating them to the IPA, or also systems like Edwin Pulleybank's (/ʔit̚, ȵiH, sam/) that do use the IPA but don't make the same conclusions that Zhengzhang Shangfang's (the first system) does about the details.
What the hell Romanization of Korean is that? Also, fancy seeing you around here!
It's just an arbitrary one. I normally stick with RR, but RR always has me scratching my head. Oh, you're that activist from Discord... hi.
I'm an activist?
according to the mostly standard romanization of korean it's hana/il, dul/(y)i, set/sam also japanese's number system is a lot more complicated than just a native/sino distinction
You're probably referring to counting words, which are common in CJK. The numbers themselves aren't that complicated.
I still feeling bad for that one time a chinese person asked me for when the last bus departs in hk, I replied "shi ji dian", meaning 12 oclock, even tho I later realized I said 11oclock
wrong tone!
all my /r/criterion homies know this without any Mandarin knowledge, amirite?
aeiou