REPORT OF SUBCOMMITTEE OF UNITED STATES GEOGRAPHIC BOARD ON A SYSTEM FOR TRANS- 

 LITERATING RUSSIAN ALPHABETIC CHARACTERS IN THE SPELLING OF PLACE NAMES. 



(March 10, 1919.) 



In a study of systems of transliterat- 

 ing into Latin letters the 36 charac- 

 ters of the Russian alphabet, it is evi- 

 dent that to transcribe them with only 

 26 Latin characters available will re- 

 quire one or the other, or both, of two 

 methods, viz, to use diacritical marks, 

 or to produce the extraneous charac- 

 ters by the employment of digraphs. 



It has been learned from the Gov- 

 ernment Printing Office that, so far as 

 concerns the printing of the words, no 

 difficulty will be incurred in the pro- 

 duction of diacritics. On the other 

 hand, the use of diacritics is attended 

 by these adverse features: When 

 spread upon maps, especially naviga- 

 tion charts, the marks may easily be 

 confused with hatching or contour 

 lines or the conventional representa- 

 tions of sand or rocks or trees, etc. ; 

 in discursive writing, stopping to con- 

 struct an unfamiliar mark causes de- 

 lay, the fruitful source of error com- 

 pelling exceptional care, whereas a di- 

 graph flows easily from the pen ; the 

 typewriting machines in ordinary use 

 do not carry diacritical marks which, 

 therefore, would have to be added by 

 pen. Finally, in its Fourth Report, 

 1916, page 15, the Geographic Board 

 included in its announced departures 

 from local usage " The avoidance of 

 the use of diacritic characters." 



The pronunciation of Russian names 

 appears to be of less vital interest now 

 than formerly ; with the great increase 

 of telegraph and post offices and the 

 growth of commerce throughout the 

 world, and the consequent expansion 

 of written communication, more atten- 

 tion is being paid to the official spell- 

 ing of place names and less to the rep- 

 resentation of pronunciation. In- 

 volved with that question, however, is 



that of retransliteration. The essen- 

 tial object of the present study is what 

 may be termed a merely graphical rep- 

 resentation of each Russian letter such 

 that a transliterated name may be un- 

 erringly restored to its original form 

 when needed, as for verification or 

 other purpose; and, while the corre- 

 sponding sounds have an important 

 function in the construction of a table 

 of equivalents, they should not be per- 

 mitted to hinder such construction 

 when there is difficulty in harmonizing 

 the vocal and the written expressions. 

 Illustration of the situation may be 

 found in other languages; as a well 

 known instance, Raclawice, the scene 

 of Kosciusko's victory, is pronounced 

 " Ratslavitse " (c having the sound of 

 ts), yet no attempt is made, on public 

 monuments in the United States or 

 elsewhere, to transcribe the name into 

 that form, probably because of the con- 

 fusion that would then attend any at- 

 tempt at restoration to the original. 

 A more familiar instance, perhaps, is 

 that of the Italian city Civita Vecchia, 

 universally and properly pronounced 

 " Chivita Veckia." To attempt to com- 

 bine a graphical transcription of char- 

 acters with complete rules and ren- 

 derings for conveying the many shades 

 of Russian pronounciation, including 

 occasional and accidental sounds, 

 would result in a system so elaborate 

 and so complex as to defeat the simple 

 object of a transliteration table and to 

 enter the domain of a grammar. 



If every Russian letter be repre- 

 sented by a letter, or combination of 

 letters, in English, then any name can 

 be transliterated correctly from Eng- 

 lish back to the original Russian form ; 

 otherwise it can not. Manifestly, the 

 finished system should be as complete 

 as possible from all points of view, and 



23 



