Wiktionary talk:Ancient Greek transliteration

Definition from Wiktionary, the free dictionary
Jump to: navigation, search

Noting and transcribing length[edit]

Someone wrote that length distinctions shouldn't be written or transcribed. This may make sense in Classicist texts, but from a linguistic standpoint it's nonsense. All linguistic works that discuss Greek indicate vowel length consistently. If a Classicist claims that there is a scientific consensus not to do this, they are wrong. Benwing (talk) 02:15, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

(I know you know this, but I make a note for people reading this page in the future:) this is also being discussed here, here and in the BP. - -sche (discuss) 17:42, 15 November 2013 (UTC)
Those conversations seemed to have gone nowhere. (Even more bizarrely, those conversations seemed to have turned into extensive discussions about coding options which went nowhere.)
What I still do not understand is: given that the existing policy already provided for the use of macrons in transliterations where they are important, what was the justification for removing Benwing's original edits? Is it just that he overdid it and added the macrons directly to the Greek? or what? — LlywelynII 15:07, 6 October 2014 (UTC)
Neither here nor there about your points but, as a matter of effective arguing on the internet, listing and linking at least some of the major examples of what you're talking about will get you a lot more mileage than saying "everyone" does this and "you are wrong". At the very least, the instant go-to for Greek on the web, Perseus, doesn't bother at all with extraneous macrons. — LlywelynII 15:11, 6 October 2014 (UTC)


I'm not going to go through and remove all of this right away, but this needs sourcing. Chi turning into "kh" was listed on Wikipedia's Romanization of Greek article, but was completely unsupported by that article's sources (ALA-LC uses "ch") and had to be removed; Xi turning into "ks" instead of "x" was never even listed at Wikipedia. Where is this 'system' coming from? Anything scholarly or reliable? — LlywelynII 15:16, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

I think I know this problem. Wikipedia policy for Ancient Greek Transliteration is The American Library Association and Library of Congress romanization scheme, namely ALA-LC. However, Wiktionary policy for Ancient Greek Transliteration is scientific transliteration scheme. Wikipedia's Romanization of Greek article talked about scientific transliteration scheme before. I'm sure I have read this one year ago. Someone must have removed this.
This policy conflict does inconvenience me. We should unify policies here. I have put up this problem in talk page of Wikipedia policy for Ancient Greek Transliteration. Maybe we need a vote or something. But the real problem may be that too many articles have already been written in these two policies in Wikipedia and Wikitionary respectively. We need a lot of work.--Qijiang ok (talk) 17:22, 20 November 2014 (UTC)