That long ago? (Catchup, 1690; ketchup: 1711; catsup, 1730)
But closest possible phonetic analog will vary by dialect/accent in both Arabic and English. There’s a reason that linguists use the IPA to represent sounds.
Actually, transliteration systems can serve either purpose, or both. It depends on what the designer had in mind.
An important point that is being missed here – the spelling “Koran” represents a transliteration from Hindustani (Hindi-Urdu), and it is a very good representation of how the word is pronounced in South Asia. We’re not obligated to use the Arabic transliteration.
“Romanization” is for the benefit of the language of origin. What we’re talking about here – transliteration into English – is for the benefit of us English speakers.
Exactly.
(Caution: anti-intellectual rant)
Many of the newer forms emanate from intellectual types who want to show you they know something you don’t. Lately this has moved from the academic world into the news media. The words we use in English are based on tradition, and once well known enough, the spellings and pronunciations continue for consistency. We don’t call Spain ‘Espana’. The country known as Qatar has been traditionally pronounced ‘ka-tar’, but during Desert Storm a few reporters came back from the region and began saying something like ‘gutter’, which doesn’t seem to quite match the local pronunciation either. Chinese and Indian cities have been getting the makeover recently as well. There’s no harm in getting more accurate spellings and pronunciations, but there isn’t much advantage either. And if the new form is still inaccurate, it only adds to the misunderstanding.
This has zip-all to do with intellectualism. Pretension, maybe, but not intellectualism.
SIL International provides a free program for typing the IPA so one need not copy and paste the symbols.
How about pseudo-intellectualism?
In /x/anukkah, is the voiceless velar fricative /x/ plain, labialised, ejective, ejective labialised, semi-labialised, strongly labialised, palatalised, or ejective palatalised?
Chanukah shmanukah
That sounds extremely dirty. Think of the phonetic children !
A friend of mine married a Shah-era Iranian man. Whenever I said Iraq or Iran, she’d snootily correct me until I pointed out she never called Spain Espana or Moscow Москва́ or Germany Bundesrepublik Deutschland.
I’m not sure what this has to do with Q’urans, Korans, or whatever, but in South Georgia, it’s eye-ran and eye-rack.
I’ve been an American my whole life and those pronunciations just make me cringe. They’ve never been standard in English. Those pronunciations will always remind me of a yokel wondering whether I was a “goddam Eyeranian.”
I didn’t say they were standard.
I do not see one. The closest I see is a set of libraries that will convert for certain programs. Which program allows you to actually type IPA?
What I currently use is this little website. I wish it could handle non-English IPA, and had a few more diacritics.
ETA:
There are diacritics for all that, but they look lousy at small font sizes.
Okay, I see where they’re coming from.
But there’s a long informal Roman-alphabet tradition of which letter goes with which. The gutteral kh is almost always spelled as ch (challah, Chanukah, mincha, tanach). Likewise, I can’t think of any standard spelling with q instead of a k. Kosher, kallah, kugel, kiddush, kaddish. Lately there’s been all sorts of spellings for the Jewish mystical tradition- cabala, qabbalah, etc- but in Jewish sources, I’ve only seen “kabbala” or similar.
This thread reminds me of a very astute column on senseless and unnecessary name changes & pronunciations:
(Caution: National Review link, for those who get upset by that sort of thing).
Also, there was a classic Saturday Night Live sketch featuring Jimmy Smits as a new reporter going to work for NBC News. All the very white, very Anglo anchors and reporters already there insist on overpronouncing Spanish words like “Sanda-NEESTAH!” , “NEEKA-RAHGUA!” and “KOO-BA!”, while Smits, the only Hispanic in the room, manages to say the names in normal, accepted English.
Anyway, my personal opinion is that for every good-faith attempt to get the transliteration “right,” there are at least as many poseurs pretending to be smarter than they really are.
I don’t remember “Cuba” in that sketch. You’re forgetting the actual funny bit, where they’re overpronouncing “Broncos,” “San Diego,” and “enchilada.”
Is there a similar reason why people started using q for k for Hebrew? Drive around Israel, and you find signs with mutant spellings like “Welcome to Petah Tiqwa” and such. I think I remember someone saying something about how one was for kuf and one was for kof, but they’re both said the same. 
[/QUOTE]
I bet that guy is a Yemeni. The “w” for a vav (or as they say, the waw) is common for Yemenis, and they do pronounce the kuf and kof differently, although I can barely tell the difference.
When babies are learning to speak, they actually produce a wide variety of sounds, but trim back their range to match what the people around them use. After a while, they lose their ability to distinguish sounds they no longer hear. We all do the same.
My father-in-law is an Iraqi and insists that the alef and the ayin (two silent letters) are pronounced differently. He keeps telling us “Can’t you hear the difference?!” No we can’t.
Another possibility, there maybe an official Israeli transliteration guide from Hebrew to Latin letters that makes the distinction between the kuf and kof.
However, more likely, the spelling has become part of a struggle in Israeli politics with one side or the other using “Q” and the other insisting on “K”. It is amazing what becomes a political football in Israeli politics.
A Yemeni who gave a talk at our shul said that the ayin is pronounced gn.