Re: DIfferent styles of writing telugu in English
Krishna Kondaka (KKONDAKA@us.oracle.com)
Mon, 22 Jan 1996 18:35:58 -0800
Some more "ooka dampuDu" from my side:-)
Pillalamarri gaaru wrote:
>I wonder which of the three schemes looks most
>"intuitive" to the completely uninitiated reader?
>From my experience in introducing RIT to some of my friends, I have observed
the following things: (The person involved has never written telugu in english)
1. As mentioned by raamakRshNa gaaru most of the people did not feel
comfortable with both capital letters and "'"s. They found it more intuitive
to if there are as less captal letters as possible. So "aa" was more intuitive
than "A" and so is "oo" than "U"
2. Also people were surprised by the interchangeable usage of "c" and "ch".
They felt that it should be "ch". This, I think,is because we, back in india,
were used to write "ch" for writing "chary",etc. Same is the case with "ee",
"ii" & "I". We were used to "ee" in such cases. for ex. sree, praveen.
Eventhough "ii/I" and "uu/U" are logical extensions of "i" and "u" they are
not as intuitive as "ee" and "oo".
3. I found "unDEdO" is less confusing than "unDaedoe" for a first timer,
eventhough neither of them are intuitive. I think "ai" and "ow/ou" are
intuitive.
So I guess it is the mixture of the first two styles that is more intuitive(or
less confusing). We can name this new style to be "kanne-pilla" style :-)
Also while reading the wRITten telugu essays I found that it would be
easier(and less confusing) to read "krishna" for "kRshNa" or "suresh" for
"surES" or "satyanarayana" for "satyanaaraayaNa" as we have been used to
reading indian names in english. Of course it would be a problem if one reads
that text using "RIT" in telugu script.
Finally, about the long words like "kalagale'danukunTa'nu", I think it would
be better to spilt them as "kalaga-lEdanu-kunTaanu" instead of putting a
hyphen after every syllable.
Krishna Kondaka