Module talk:cau-nec-translit

oi
I'm basing. It's compatible. I'm discussing. ɶLerman (talk) 20:34, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

Undo your incorrect edit. ɶLerman (talk) 20:36, 2 August 2023 (UTC)


 * @ɶLerman What are you basing this on? Theknightwho (talk) 20:38, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Do I have to disclose this information to you? ɶLerman (talk) 20:51, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
 * @ɶLerman Yes. Theknightwho (talk) 21:02, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Nichols, Vagapov 2004: 21. ɶLerman (talk) 21:08, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
 * @ɶLerman That doesn't justify changing one thing to make it inconsistent with the rest of the scheme. Theknightwho (talk) 21:13, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
 * On the contrary, it shows that all (all poorly describes the situation) of your scheme is incorrect. ɶLerman (talk) 21:17, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
 * @ɶLerman No, all it shows is that it's a different scheme. Theknightwho (talk) 21:18, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Of course, this is a different scheme, but this particular scheme is correct. And you came up with your own scheme yourself, you confessed to me in the discord, to which I was forbidden access by user:Vininn126. ɶLerman (talk) 21:23, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
 * @ɶLerman Are you claiming that only one correct transliteration scheme exists for Chechen? What are you basing that on? Theknightwho (talk) 21:28, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
 * I can't know this, but it's better to write down diphthongs as she has in the scheme, because when stitching a vowel and an iotized vowel, difficulty may appear. ɶLerman (talk) 21:34, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
 * @ɶLerman What difficulty? Theknightwho (talk) 21:38, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Distinctions of a diphthong and a iotized vowel in transcription. Excuse me, it's almost one o'clock in the morning (night??) in Moscow, I'll write to you tomorrow. Good night. ɶLerman (talk) 21:42, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
 * @ɶLerman Could you give an example of where this would be ambiguous? Because I can't find any in the list of lemmas we have. Theknightwho (talk) 21:46, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Hi. Unfortunately, I didn't find anything either. This applies to old sources, because in 2020 (if I'm not mistaken) there was a spelling reform. Ok. I also don't understand why there is ий = ii in your scheme, but there is no ув = uu, which now replaces uw. For example, A Grammar of Chechen (2017) uses eв = eu and ов = ou. ɶLerman (talk) 08:23, 4 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Hello. ɶLerman (talk) 18:53, 5 August 2023 (UTC)
 * At least warn me that you have not left this discussion POG ɶLerman (talk) 10:02, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
 * I will also add that your scheme is very similar to hers in many ways. And it is these elements that add correctness. You can take something good from your scheme, for example, letters with a caron and diphthongs from her scheme. ɶLerman (talk) 21:29, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
 * @ɶLerman That doesn't answer the question. Theknightwho (talk) 21:30, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
 * That was really not the answer to the question. Yes. You didn't have a question sentence. ɶLerman (talk) 21:36, 2 August 2023 (UTC)

"Substitute i for dotted dotless i if not followed by an acute or tilde, then recompose."
"i" does not decompose to "dotted dotless i", nor does "dotted dotless i" compose to "i". (I can see "dotted dotless i" render badly on my end due to my personal font choices.) —Fish bowl (talk) 00:05, 20 July 2024 (UTC)