transliteration scheme (Re: [Advaita-l] sAmAnya dharma and viSeSha dharma)

[Ravisankar Mayavaram]

ITRANS gives some options which will lead to further confusion. For instance
nArAyaNaH  - naarAyaNaH; both with come out correctly in the software.
We can simplify by removing those options and therby the ambiguity.
Also, I remember there was some backward compatbility with (^N and
~N). In the case of anusvara, ".n" does not come out well when it is
at the end - like nArAyaNaM is better than nArAyaNa.n  and in the same
vein it does better phonetically  when it is inbetween Sa.nkaraM. But
Sa.nkaraM can be written better as SaN^karaM.


Vowels

a     A       i       I       u     U   R^i    R^I    L^i    L^I e    
ai     o     au     aM    aH

Consonants:

k     kh     g     gh     ^N
ch    Ch     j     jh     ~n
T     Th     D     Dh     N
t     th     d     dh     n
p     ph     b     bh     m
y     r      l     v
S   Sh     s     h      L
x       j~n



Specials/Accents:
-----------------
Anusvara:       .n / M
Avagraha:       .a
Ardhachandra:   .c    (for vowel sound as in english words `cat' or `talk')
Chandra-Bindu:  .N    (chandra-bindu on top of previous letter)
Halant:		.h    (to get half-form of the consonant - no vowel - virama)
Visarga:        H     (visarga - looks like a colon character)
Om:		 AUM





On 1/17/06, Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar at braincells.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 12 Jan 2006, Amuthan Arunkumar R wrote:
>
> >
> > sorry to deviate from the topic, but can we (at least
> > now) commonly agree on one transliteration scheme so
> > that no such inconveniences arise in the future?
> >
>
> Well in theory we are all using the ITRANS scheme[1] but in practice
> people don't always follow it exactly.  I know sometimes I am in too much
> of a rush to encode words properly.
>
> [1] http://www.aczoom.com/itrans/#itransencoding
>
> --
> Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar at braincells.com>