Re: Mongolian Transcription (Bataar vs. Baatar)

[David Marjanovic <david.marjanovic@gmx.at>]

>   Despite this, the spelling of each name listed is incorrect regarding
> the initial nomenclature. Each of these names, even those taxa named in
> America, end in -bataar. Whatever book you have that lists it the other
> way around is screwed up or an attempt to "fix" nomenclature according to
> another system.

All these are certainly ICZN-correct -- as is *T. bataar*, which is spelled 
this way in that book. All other books and papers I've seen write all these 
the same way as I quoted them.

>   The double a is a stress on the vowel sound,

Is it stress? And/or length? To me it looks like an analogy to e. g. Finnish 
where double vowels indicate length... then there are monosyllabic words like 
khaan* where stress is inapplicable.

* Insert long waffling about the use of kh. :-)

> as appears in the double u
> of *Shuvuuia*, which is approximated in some transcriptions with
> diacritics. Hence ö for what is normally a "oo" with stress, as in
> American "book", or "uu" in other stranscriptions.

Definitely not. Ö [try to make a beautiful vowel of "er"] and u [as in 
"butcher", "bush"...] are different sounds, and different letters in 
Cyrillic! Double ö and ü exist, too.

Rest offlist, in case anyone is interested please tell me.