# Romanisation of Hebrew



## k8an

As someone who learned the Hebrew and English alphabets at the same time, I have never found a need to write Hebrew in Latin. However, now that my iPhone is broken and I have to use Latin, it is really annoying me that I don't have a universally accepted way to write.

It has occurred to me that speakers of most other languages with different scripts have developed a kind of "default" Romanised version of their language for texting and Internet usage (Arabic, Persian, Hindi, Urdu, Panjabi, Chinese, Russian, Greek etc etc), whilst in Hebrew this isn't really the case. In Israel, for example, everybody uses the Hebrew script on Facebook and for texting for Internet communication almost exclusively; in Egypt, Lebanon and other countries using foreign scripts, many people don't even have keyboards for their languages. I have some theories for this:

1) In the case of Arabic dialects, there is no standard way to write these languages in the Arabic script, so Romanising the language is seen as a more accurate way of writing the dialect (for example, Lebanese "shu 3am t3mol?" more accurately represents the sounds than "شو عم تعمل؟") without it looking like Standard Arabic. 

2) The Hebrew script is fairly "easy" and doesn't require joint letters, vowels or any other additions added to it (like in Hindi), so Romanising actually makes the words _longer.



_Notably, several of these languages have developed ways to represent their sounds that Latin characters can't represent. Examples include numbers for Arabic dialects (ق ص ط خ ح ع as 3 7 5 6 9 2), Hindi/Urdu (n for nasal sounds), and Greek (x for kh, w for o). I wonder why Hebrew hasn't really done this to much of an extent.

Whilst I am extremely happy that people still use our script, I wonder if some kind of Romanised standard might be developed one day. I propose that the Arabic system with numbers is most appropriate - even though ח and כ are pronounced the same, it would be nice to have people write them separately as 7 and 5 to help get the meaning across.

What do people think of this? I think it would really help people in situations such as mine and help learners of Hebrew too with getting some kind of head start into the language. I do fear that it might decrease use of the Hebrew script, but don't imagine this would be likely on a significant scale as Hebrew scripts are increasingly available on devices (except mine) and still help keep the writing shorter.


----------



## willem81

That's an interesting question. But I believe it's the same as was with Yiddish once. Latinize Yiddish - and it will be just like German, so the Yiddish speakers always used Hebrew script. Am I right? Did a latinized form of Yiddish ever exist?


----------



## arielipi

The problem runs deeper than what you show;
In some cases, old words have been developed to be written in many forms
Turkey can be written with either ט ת כ ק all permutations.
ח can be kh as in khan, h as in hummus and some even extend it to ch.
many letters have many forms due to many centuries.
What is now mostly advised by the akademia is the following:
ח kh
כ kaf is c
כ achtung is ch
ק is for q and k
ט is for t
ת is for th
צ is tz, although i prefer it would be ts (and most surprisingly, i usually support one form for all words, צ is an exception, sometimes i feel tz is better and sometimes ts is better)
צ' is ch
ס is s
ש שמאלית is pretty neglected but if it is ss at the end of the word it will be שס או סש
did i miss any letters?


----------



## origumi

There's no standard. People improvise by common sense.


----------



## Drink

origumi said:


> There's no standard. People improvise by common sense.



There are standards actually. The Academy actually recommends two different standards (a simple one and a more complicated one). The problem is that no one knows these standards (unless they need to), and no one would care anyway because they use the Hebrew alphabet for written communication.


----------



## origumi

Drink said:


> There are standards actually. The Academy actually recommends two different standards (a simple one and a more complicated one). The problem is that no one knows these standards (unless they need to), and no one would care anyway because they use the Hebrew alphabet for written communication.


There are several other standards, like the simple and complicated of the Academia. The complicated ones are unusable because they either contain letters that do not appear on the keyboard or are unnatural. The simple ones could be good but are not really accepted. Those standards were intended for printed or formal text, place names, academic material, and do not address the peculiarities of SMS, tweet, etc. So in practice there's no standard for casual Hebrew Romanization.


----------



## Drink

origumi said:


> There are several other standards, like the simple and complicated of the Academia. The complicated ones are unusable because they either contain letters that do not appear on the keyboard or are unnatural. The simple ones could be good but are not really accepted. Those standards were intended for printed or formal text, place names, academic material, and do not address the peculiarities of SMS, tweet, etc. So in practice there's no standard for casual Hebrew Romanization.



In that sense, there technically is no _standard_ for any casual romanization; there are just _commonly used_ systems like the one for Arabic. Also, Russian is another language where the romanization is improvised by everyone.


----------



## k8an

I am aware of how it goes currently as I have been speaking Hebrew for almost as long as English. However I am wondering why we don't make our own version of "Arabish". I find writing Hebrew in Latin to be tiring and irritating, eg: is תעבוד taavod/ta'vod/ta'avod or could it be "t3vod"? Is מאושר meushar/m'ushar/me'ushar or could it be me2ushar? I know this seems trivial but writing long messages gets pretty annoying. Also, I frequently am asked to teach my friends how to read and write - with Arabic speakers I always end up explaining using the Arabish system and it makes perfect sense. I know there are guidelines but having a method that people use and communicate easily with could be good.


----------



## Drink

k8an said:


> Also, I frequently am asked to teach my friends how to read and write - with Arabic speakers I always end up explaining using the Arabish system and it makes perfect sense. I know there are guidelines but having a method that people use and communicate easily with could be good.



In my opinion, when learning to read and write in a foreign alphabet, transliterations are your worst enemy.


----------



## origumi

k8an said:


> is תעבוד taavod/ta'vod/ta'avod or could it be "t3vod"? Is מאושר meushar/m'ushar/me'ushar or could it be me2ushar?


Arabic transcription with additional "chat letters" is built for Arabic. Digits were added by similarity to Arabic letters. This system covers Arabic sounds. It seems out of context to use the Arabic rules as-is for Hebrew. Of course one can suggest similar system for Hebrew.


----------



## Drink

origumi said:


> Arabic transcription with additional "chat letters" is built for Arabic. Digits were added by similarity to Arabic letters. This system covers Arabic sounds. It seems out of context to use the Arabic rules as-is for Hebrew. Of course one can suggest similar system for Hebrew.



I tend to like ' for א and ` for ע.


----------



## arielipi

I tend to either put a tag between vowel and aleph/ayin consonant. ayin is preferably bold.


----------



## لنـا

k8an said:


> It has occurred to me that speakers of most other languages with different scripts have developed a kind of "default" Romanised version of their language for texting and Internet usage (Arabic, Persian, Hindi, Urdu, Panjabi, Chinese, Russian, Greek etc etc), whilst in Hebrew this isn't really the case. In Israel, for example, everybody uses the Hebrew script on Facebook and for texting for Internet communication almost exclusively; in Egypt, Lebanon and other countries using foreign scripts, many people don't even have keyboards for their languages. I have some theories for this:
> 
> 1) In the case of Arabic dialects, there is no standard way to write these languages in the Arabic script, so Romanising the language is seen as a more accurate way of writing the dialect (for example, Lebanese "shu 3am t3mol?" more accurately represents the sounds than "شو عم تعمل؟") without it looking like Standard Arabic.




Its an exception that your iphone is broken and you can't write Hebrew, but I don't understand why people use "Arabish" in their iphone so far, since in iphone itself we have "Arabic alphabet with diacritics-تشكيل or Nikkod in Hebrew" (َ ُ ِ ) and its directives. I don't think "shu 3am ti3mol" is more accurate that شو عَم تِعْمُلْ, as for ط or ט that can't be written in English than "t".
As for Hebrew I use:
*Tz - Tsadi צ
ch or kh - Khaf כ
ch or kh - Khet ח
' - Alef א
` - Ayin ע
*


----------



## k8an

لنـا said:


> Its an exception that your iphone is broken and you can't write Hebrew, but I don't understand why people use "Arabish" in their iphone so far, since in iphone itself we have "Arabic alphabet with diacritics-تشكيل or Nikkod in Hebrew"(َ ُ ِ ) and its directives. I don't think "shu 3am ti3mol" is more accurate that شو عَم تِعْمُلْ, as for ط or ט that can't be written in English than "t".
> As for Hebrew I use:
> *Tz - Tsadi צ
> ch or kh - Khaf כ
> ch or kh - Khet ח
> ' - Alef א
> ` - Ayin ע
> *



You can write ط as 6. 

I know what you're saying but the vast majority of my friends in Lebanon, Egypt, the entire Maghreb and some of my Gulf friends laugh at me for even having an Arabic keyboard. If you look online, the Internet is full of it. Lots of people prefer it for dialects (not fus7a, though). I don't think it's right or wrong - it's just how it is. 

I do the same for Hebrew except I don't write א and ע in that way. I doubt any one of my friends or family in Israel understands that (I just asked a couple), but I'm glad yours do. My eye is too lazy to look for that difference


----------



## k8an

Drink said:


> I tend to like ' for א and ` for ע.



Israelis as a general rule aren't familiar with that and my eye seems to be lazy about distinguishing between those


----------



## k8an

origumi said:


> Arabic transcription with additional "chat letters" is built for Arabic. Digits were added by similarity to Arabic letters. This system covers Arabic sounds. It seems out of context to use the Arabic rules as-is for Hebrew. Of course one can suggest similar system for Hebrew.



Thank you, that's exactly what I meant!


----------



## k8an

Drink said:


> In my opinion, when learning to read and write in a foreign alphabet, transliterations are your worst enemy.



I share your opinion. However, for the first lesson...


----------



## Drink

k8an said:


> Israelis as a general rule aren't familiar with that and my eye seems to be lazy about distinguishing between those



You don't usually _need_ to distinguish them, since they are pronounced the same by most people. In fact you can not write them at all and still be fine.


----------



## k8an

Drink said:


> You don't usually _need_ to distinguish them, since they are pronounced the same by most people. In fact you can not write them at all and still be fine.



I know. But mixing them up when writing is common in Israel unfortunately, so I wouldn't want to encourage it further.


----------



## لنـا

k8an said:


> You can write ط as 6.
> 
> I know what you're saying but the vast majority of my friends in Lebanon, Egypt, the entire Maghreb and some of my Gulf friends laugh at me for even having an Arabic keyboard. If you look online, the Internet is full of it. Lots of people prefer it for dialects (not fus7a, though). I don't think it's right or wrong - it's just how it is.
> 
> I do the same for Hebrew except I don't write א and ע in that way. I doubt any one of my friends or family in Israel understands that (I just asked a couple), but I'm glad yours do. My eye is too lazy to look for that difference



That is the point! they are ashamed of their language, because some laugh at me too
And yes, that's confusing


----------



## David S

I think it's unfortunate that the tsadi is often transliterated as "tz" instead of "ts". "T" is an unvoiced consonant while "z" is voiced. In laymen's terms, voicing a "t" turns it into a "d". When I was first learned Hebrew I would say the tsadi like the "ds" in "woo*ds*" until my Hebrew teacher corrected me.


----------



## Drink

David S said:


> I think it's unfortunate that the tsadi is often transliterated as "tz" instead of "ts". "T" is an unvoiced consonant while "z" is voiced. In laymen's terms, voicing a "t" turns it into a "d". When I was first learned Hebrew I would say the tsadi like the "ds" in "woo*ds*" until my Hebrew teacher corrected me.



Well I think historically there were many languages that used "tz" for the /ts/ sound, and many still do, such as German. But anyway I learned this convention at a young age and don't remember ever confusing it.


----------



## k8an

I'd never even thought of that. Good point, though.


----------



## MuttQuad

Few non-Latin scripts have a _universally accepted_ standard for Romanizing them. A major exception is PRC Chinese, where there is government-developed Roman form called Pin Yin.  I am not sure if this was ever adopted on Taiwan, where the Wade-Giles or Yale systems might still be in use.

Many non-Latin scripts even have unique forms of Braille, but these have been more or less standardized and published some years ago in a book (which I helped to produce) by the US Library of Congress.


----------

