It is also at least logically possible for there to be transliterations from Semitic writing systems to non-Roman writing systems. I'm not aware of such a thing, but one can imagine, for example, Russian work using a Cyrillic-based transliteration. Even if such things are not in scholarly use, I bet they are used in phrase books for travelers and that sort of thing. I have used Japanese tourist guides and phrase books that transliterate foreign languages into kana.
On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 2:58 PM, Stephan Stiller <[email protected]>wrote: > > I assume you mean "Romanization," when you say "transliteration." >>> >> Well, isn't "Romanization" a special case of "transliteration"? >> > > Sometimes a transliteration-transcription distinction is made, raising the > question of whether "transcription" is a hypernym of "transliteration" and > "non-transliterating 'transcription'" (perhaps Wiki will help sort out > usage some day, like it so often does). In any case, if this distinction is > made, a romanization is not necessarily a transliteration (in the sense of > there being a 1-to-1 mapping between word forms in the two scripts). And if > this distinction is not made, people are likely to use the word > "transcription" instead, is my impression. > > Stephan > > >
