search

shabados / gurmukhi-utils

Utilities library for converting, analyzing, and testing Gurmukhi strings.
MIT License
30 stars 9 forks source link

Hindi pronunciation should be written out instead of symbolized (ੴ) #109

Open bhajneet opened 4 years ago

bhajneet commented 4 years ago

Our english and urdu pronunciations do not symbolize ik oankaar. They are written out in their native scripts to help readers pronounce gurmukhi.

image

Hindi pronunciation is following a centuries old tradition of hindi-written gutkas using gurmukhi for ੴ. This would not help newcomers who speak/read exclusively hindi understand how to pronounce it.

Given that we have the gurmukhi always on display, the pronunciation would be pretty easy to connect with gurmukhi ੴ.

Instead I propose we show इक ओंकार or इक-ओंकार (उोंकार? needs proper confirmation) (the equivalent of gurmukhi's iek EMkwr) to help hindi readers get an insight into the important pronunciation of this.

I would imagine hindi speakers, who lived in punjab and have some exposure to sikhi, would maybe know how to pronounce ੴ (though some would likely be slightly off in their pronunciation), and others who didn't go to gurdwaras or had any real exposure to sikhi, I can't imagine they would know what the second symbol is. Surely, they'll get the "ik" part since it's the same in both languages.

Proposal will help both types of speakers in their correct pronunciation of ੴ (ik oankaar). I will talk to some people in person to help get a consensus of what is best for those hindi readers/speakers to better access the gurmukhi script.

sarabveer commented 4 years ago

If the display is the issue, then should be adding Noto Gurmukhi with the same weight as the Noto Devanagari. As done on https://unicode.sarabveer.me

sarabveer commented 4 years ago

The strict transliteration of ਇੱਕ ਓਅੰਕਾਰ would be इक ओअंकार

sarabveer commented 4 years ago

If we were to function more on pronunciation, rather than how hindi gutkas have done it, would it make sense to revert this commit?

https://github.com/ShabadOS/gurmukhi-utils/commit/9b2db534f95e75ef6c8a98da4b66a1d17a4981d5#diff-9ca2fd03450710565328b2617ebdc2f3

bhajneet commented 4 years ago

we should basically have transliteration, pronunciation as separate fields. one is for reading gurbani in a different script as it is written in as close to the same way as possible with a back and forth compatibility assuming rules. the pronunciation is for speaking purposes and could include different schools of though (saha vs shaha for king)

sarabveer commented 4 years ago

Depends #124