Yes, that would be the normal convention, i.e. surnames are in the colloquial pronunciation, and given names are in the literal pronunciation.xiaojian wrote:
Usually formal readings for people's given names: (e.g. 天正 is Thian-cheng, 海水 is Hai-swee, but some exceptions; my grandmother's name, 金葉, is read Kim-hyor, with hyor being an informal reading)
This is interesting, as the use of 阿 (un-nasalised) is used in Malaysia. It could very well be that Burmese Hokkien has preserved a distinction that has been lost elsewhere.xiaojian wrote:
- Nasalized 阿 = 俺 (not sure if it's specific to certain regions), but 俺公俺嬤 are almost universal, while 阿公阿嬤 are almost unheard of. Also, nicknames tend to use 俺 (my uncle's pet name is 俺明, an-beng), not 阿.
Actually, I find that -e- (and by extension, -eng) is the more phonetically-accurate way to Romanise them, and that is how I normally Romanise those words. I suspect this -i- spelling convention is Mandarin-influenced.xiaojian wrote:
eng instead of -ing (慶 is kheng, not khing; 明 is beng, not bing; 正 is cheng, not ching; 警 is keng, not king)
That really depends on the words themselves; some are, in fact, aspirated, while others are not. 姊 is unaspirated, yes. But 刺 and 翅 are aspirated. Do you mean that normally-aspirated words are unaspirated in Burmese Hokkien?xiaojian wrote:
- Preference for unaspirated initial consonants, as in Burmese (姊姊 is usually unaspirated, not 'chi', more like 'ci')