SoullessAutomaton comments on What's in a name? That which we call a rationalist… - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (88)
For comparison, beisu would be pronounced roughly like "base". If the sibilant in "Bayes" is voiced, as I would expect, then beizu would be more accurate (this actually bothered me a bit when reading Eliezer's earlier stuff, but it seemed too petty to bring up at the time). However, I have seen a few badly-rendered loanwords imported into Japanese in a way that matches the romaji letters to the original spelling, rather than matching the actual phonetics.
For extra fun, these would be written as ベイズ使い or ベイス使い (the latter using the unvoiced consonant).
Huh. The way I mentally pronounce this seems to be closer to bei-su-tzkai than bei-zu-tzkai, but when I say it out loud, it can come out either way.
Does anyone know how "Bayes" itself is standardly written in Japanese?
Apparently it's written as beizu.
In hindsight it would have made more sense for me to just look that up in the first place rather than pontificating about transliteration in my previous post. Ah, well.
Well now I'm torn. Damn it, in writing, "beisutsukai" looks far better than "beizutsukai" and it may even sound better.
Could always handwave something about the fictional world in which the beisutsukai exist as having drifted norms of English pronunciation such that a word-terminal "s" is never voiced, making "Bayes" sound like "base".
Other than that, though, beizu remains more accurate, unfortunately.
Not to me. z's are inherently cooler than s's.
You've already coined the word. Too late to change it!