Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

ALA-LC romanization

ALA-LC romanization is a standardized set of transliteration schemes designed to convert text from non-Latin scripts into the Latin alphabet, developed jointly by the American Library Association (ALA) and the Library of Congress (LC) to support consistent bibliographic control in libraries.^[1] The primary purpose of these tables is to enable uniform representation of foreign-language materials in library catalogs, thereby improving searchability, accessibility, and interoperability across library systems worldwide.^[1] Adopted extensively by U.S. and international libraries, the system ensures that users can reliably locate resources regardless of the original script. The development of ALA-LC romanization traces back to the mid-20th century, when individual schemes for specific scripts were first published in the Library of Congress's Cataloging Service Bulletin to address the growing need for standardized cataloging of non-Roman materials.^[2] These efforts evolved through ongoing collaboration between ALA, LC, and international experts, culminating in the comprehensive 1997 edition of the ALA-LC Romanization Tables, which compiled 54 schemes for languages and scripts ranging from Amharic to Yiddish.^[3] Since then, the tables have been periodically revised and expanded—for instance, with the addition of Kazakh, Lepcha, and Manchu schemes in 2012—to incorporate feedback from catalogers and reflect changes in linguistic scholarship.^[4] The most recent updates occurred in August 2025, maintaining the system's relevance in digital cataloging environments.^[1] Key features of ALA-LC romanization include detailed mappings for characters, diacritics, and numerals in each script, along with guidelines for capitalization, word division, and handling of variant forms to preserve scholarly accuracy while prioritizing readability.^[3] Unlike pronunciation-based systems, it emphasizes one-to-one transliteration for reversibility, allowing reconstruction of the original script where possible.^[3] The tables are approved by both ALA and LC, serving as the authoritative standard for the Library of Congress's cataloging practices and influencing global library standards.^[1]

Background

Definition and Purpose

ALA-LC romanization refers to a collection of transliteration schemes designed to convert text from over 70 non-Roman scripts into equivalents using the Latin alphabet, transliterating the characters from the original scripts into Latin alphabet equivalents.^[1] These schemes, jointly approved by the American Library Association (ALA) and the Library of Congress (LC), provide standardized rules for rendering characters, diacritics, and word divisions from diverse writing systems into Roman letters suitable for Western bibliographic use.^[1] The main purpose of ALA-LC romanization is to support efficient cataloging, searching, and indexing of library materials written in non-Latin scripts, promoting uniformity across library databases and records.^[1] By converting foreign-language titles, names, and subjects into a familiar script, it allows non-specialists to approximate pronunciations and locate resources without needing proficiency in the original writing systems, thereby enhancing accessibility for researchers and the general public in English-speaking environments.^[1] In response to early 20th-century library needs for handling growing collections of international materials, this system ensures consistent representation in catalogs like the Library of Congress Online Catalog.^[1] The scope of ALA-LC romanization is focused on bibliographic control within library and archival contexts, particularly in North American institutions, rather than serving as a tool for precise linguistic phonetics, scholarly transcription, or informal everyday transliteration.^[1] It originated to standardize library practices in North America, offering a reliable framework in contrast to the varied ad-hoc methods previously employed for non-Roman materials.

Historical Development

The ALA-LC romanization system originated in the early 20th century through collaborative efforts between the American Library Association (ALA) and the Library of Congress (LC) to standardize the transliteration of non-Roman scripts into the Latin alphabet for consistent library cataloging.^[1] The first formal set of ALA-LC Romanization Tables was published in 1941, unifying previously separate guidelines from ALA and LC to address growing needs for handling diverse international materials in U.S. libraries.^[1] Following World War II, the tables underwent significant expansions, particularly for Slavic languages using Cyrillic script and various Asian scripts, driven by the influx of global collections into American institutions and the demand for accessible bibliographic access to these materials.^[5]^[1] A pivotal milestone came in 1997 with the publication of the comprehensive ALA-LC Romanization Tables: Transliteration Schemes for Non-Roman Scripts, which compiled, revised, and approved over 50 tables for languages across Oriental, Semitic, and Slavic families, drawing from earlier entries in the Library of Congress's Cataloging Service Bulletin.^[2]^[1] In the 2010s, the system evolved from its print-era foundations to support digital environments, incorporating adaptations for Unicode encoding to enable seamless integration in machine-readable cataloging formats like MARC records.^[1] Throughout its development, ALA-LC romanization has drawn influence from international standards, such as ISO 9 for Slavic scripts, to promote interoperability while prioritizing practical utility in library contexts.^[1]

Standards and Governance

Approving Bodies

The ALA-LC romanization standards are jointly developed and approved by the American Library Association (ALA) and the Library of Congress (LC), serving as the primary bodies responsible for their creation and endorsement.^[1] The ALA, through its specialized committees, contributes scholarly and professional expertise to ensure the standards align with broader library cataloging practices.^[6] Meanwhile, the LC takes primary responsibility for ongoing maintenance, implementation in national bibliographic systems, and publication of the official romanization tables.^[1] The ALA's roles are executed via key committees, including the Committee on Cataloging: Description and Access (CC:DA) for non-Asian and non-African languages, and the Committee on Cataloging: Asian and African Materials (CC:AAM) for relevant scripts, which review and provide final approval on proposed tables following a public comment period.^[6] The LC, in turn, coordinates the development process, incorporating feedback from these committees to refine tables before official adoption and distribution.^[7] This collaborative framework has been in place since the mid-20th century, with joint efforts formalizing the shared governance of the standards.^[6] Within the LC, the Policy, Training, and Cooperative Programs Division (PTCP) oversees the approval process for all romanization tables, managing submissions, reviews, and updates to maintain consistency across U.S. federal libraries and aligned institutions.^[8] The PTCP ensures that proposals undergo rigorous evaluation, including a 30-day public review, before forwarding them to ALA committees for endorsement, thereby upholding the standards' reliability for global bibliographic access.^[8]

Revision Process and Recent Updates

The revision process for ALA-LC romanization tables begins with the submission of proposals for new or revised tables by experts or interested parties to the Library of Congress via [email protected], including draft tables and detailed justifications.^[8] The ALA-LC Romanization Tables Review Board, a joint body comprising seven members (three from the Library of Congress and four from American Library Association committees), appoints a Review Subcommittee of subject experts within 30 days to evaluate the proposal.^[8] The subcommittee conducts an initial review over 30 to 60 days, solicits public comments through a 30-day period announced on the Library of Congress website and shared with relevant professional organizations, and then revises the draft within an additional 30 days based on feedback.^[8] The revised proposal is forwarded to the full Review Board, which may request further changes before granting final approval; approved tables are subsequently published on the Library of Congress website.^[8] Revisions to the tables occur irregularly, driven by linguistic evolutions in scripts, user feedback from catalogers and scholars, or emerging needs in bibliographic control, rather than on a fixed schedule.^[1] The comprehensive ALA-LC Romanization Tables manual was last issued in print in 1997, compiling schemes for numerous scripts, but since then, updates have been handled through online supplements and individual table revisions to allow for more agile responses to specific requirements.^[1] This approach reflects the collaborative governance between the Library of Congress and the American Library Association, ensuring that changes align with broader cataloging standards while incorporating input from diverse linguistic communities.^[8] Since 2020, several notable updates have been approved to address gaps in coverage and refine existing schemes. In 2022, the Japanese romanization table was revised to better accommodate modern usage patterns and align with international standards like ISO 3602, following extensive review and community input.^[1] The following year, in spring 2023, a new table for the ADLaM script used in the Fula language was developed and approved, marking one of the first additions for a recently created African writing system and involving direct collaboration with script users to ensure cultural accuracy.^[1] Most recently, in July 2025, a thoroughly revised Balinese romanization table was approved after a review process that included public comments from May to June, updating the 2012 version to reflect contemporary orthographic practices in the Balinese script.^[1] Post-2020 revisions have placed increased emphasis on digital accessibility and compatibility, with guidelines mandating that new or updated tables prioritize machine-transliteration capabilities and reversibility to support automated cataloging and linked data applications.^[8] This shift addresses limitations in older tables, particularly for non-Indo-European scripts, by incorporating support for Unicode versions 14.0 and later to handle rare characters and diacritics more effectively in digital environments.^[9] Such enhancements facilitate broader discoverability in online library systems while maintaining scholarly precision.^[8]

Principles of Romanization

Key Methodological Rules

The ALA-LC romanization system employs transliteration schemes that prioritize the accurate representation of the original script's orthographic structure over phonetic replication or popular English-language spellings, ensuring scholarly precision for academic and bibliographic purposes.^[10] This approach distinguishes it from pronunciation-based systems by focusing on one-to-one mappings between non-Roman characters and Latin equivalents, often using diacritics to denote specific sounds or distinctions not present in the basic Latin alphabet.^[10] For instance, diacritics such as the háček (e.g., č for the affricate /tʃ/) and macron (e.g., ā for long /a/) are systematically applied to consonants and vowels, respectively, drawing from a predefined set including acute, grave, breve, dieresis, tilde, circumflex, and dot above marks.^[11] Conventions for formatting align with standard English practices to facilitate integration into library catalogs and publications. Capitalization follows English norms, with initial letters of proper nouns and sentence starts uppercased, while special guidelines may apply for certain scripts like Arabic or Hebrew to handle definite articles or particles. Abbreviations are rendered with periods where appropriate, preserving the original script's intent without alteration, and numbers are typically expressed in Western Arabic numerals unless a script-specific table mandates equivalents for non-decimal systems.^[11] Script-specific adaptations ensure flexibility while maintaining core principles, with reversible schemes preferred for alphabetic scripts like Cyrillic to allow unambiguous mapping back to the source.^[11] Ligatures and variant forms are handled by resolving them to their component characters or standard equivalents, avoiding ambiguity in the romanized output. The system's "back-conversion" principle underscores this reversibility, enabling the reconstruction of the original script from the romanized form in most cases, which supports machine-transliteration and long-term bibliographic utility.^[11] This design choice enhances interoperability in digital environments while upholding the transliteration's scholarly integrity.^[8]

Distinctions from Transliteration

ALA-LC romanization represents a specialized subset of transliteration, tailored specifically for converting non-Roman scripts into the Latin alphabet to support bibliographic access and library cataloging.^[1] In contrast, transliteration broadly encompasses any systematic conversion between scripts, often with varying goals such as phonetic approximation or linguistic analysis.^[12] A primary distinction lies in ALA-LC's focus on uniformity for indexing and retrieval in shared library systems, which leads to practices like omitting short vowels in Semitic scripts unless they appear as explicit vocalization in the source material.^[12] This contrasts with broader transliteration systems, such as those from ISO, which may incorporate more detailed phonetic mappings to reduce ambiguity in spoken representation, potentially complicating catalog consistency.^[13] Conceptually, ALA-LC prioritizes structural and morphological accuracy over auditory fidelity, excluding elements like stress marks that could aid pronunciation but hinder standardized filing.^[12] It is thus not designed for language instruction or phonetic transcription, but rather for reversible script representation that preserves the original's informational integrity.^[1] Notably, the Resource Description and Access (RDA) standard, effective since 2010, adopts "transliteration" as its preferred term to enhance global applicability and avoid Latin-centric connotations, yet ALA-LC retains "romanization" in its official documentation to reflect longstanding conventions.^[14]^[1] This terminology persists alongside RDA's guidelines, where ALA-LC schemes serve as the approved method for such conversions.^[15]

Applications

Library Cataloging and MARC Standards

The ALA-LC romanization system plays a central role in library cataloging, particularly under Resource Description and Access (RDA), where it is the standard for romanizing personal and corporate names as well as titles from non-Roman scripts to ensure consistent access points in bibliographic records.^[16] This mandatory application facilitates the creation of uniform headings that link related works across library systems, supporting descriptive cataloging practices that prioritize retrievability for users unfamiliar with original scripts.^[17] In MARC (Machine-Readable Cataloging) records, ALA-LC romanization integrates with field 880, which provides alternate graphic representations for parallel scripts, allowing both the original non-Roman text and its romanized equivalent to coexist in a single record.^[18] Since the late 1990s, MARC has supported Unicode encoding, with UTF-8 adopted as the standard in the early 2000s to handle diacritics and complex characters accurately, enabling libraries to store and display romanized forms with precise phonetic representation alongside vernacular scripts.^[19] This evolution addresses earlier constraints where only romanized data could be included, enhancing multilingual access without compromising data integrity.^[20] Practically, ALA-LC ensures uniform access in large-scale union catalogs such as WorldCat, where romanized headings serve as primary search terms for English-language users.^[21] For instance, a Hebrew title like "תנ"ך" (Tanakh) is romanized as "Tanakh" to enable English searches while linking to the original script via MARC 880 fields, promoting discoverability across diverse collections.^[22] Until its discontinuation in 2023, the Library of Congress's Cataloger's Desktop tool incorporated ALA-LC tables to provide automated romanization assistance, streamlining workflows and mitigating pre-Unicode limitations in print catalogs that restricted entries to basic romanized text without vernacular support.^[23]^[24]

Publishing and Academic Use

In academic publishing, ALA-LC romanization serves as a standard for transliterating non-Latin scripts into Latin characters, particularly in footnotes, bibliographies, and bibliographic descriptions for English-language scholarly works.^[1] For instance, the Chicago Manual of Style, in its guidelines for alphabetic conversion of foreign languages, recommends the ALA-LC Romanization Tables as a comprehensive resource for ensuring consistency in representing scripts such as Arabic, Cyrillic, and Chinese.^[25] Harvard University Press, aligned with Harvard Library practices, employs ALA-LC tables for romanizing materials in Middle East and Islamic studies, facilitating accurate citation of non-Latin sources in academic monographs.^[26] While mandatory in technical bibliographic sections, its use is often optional in popular nonfiction, where publishers may prioritize accessibility over full scholarly precision. In academic disciplines like linguistics and area studies, ALA-LC romanization is the preferred method for citing and referencing non-Latin texts, enabling scholars to standardize transliterations in research articles, theses, and conference proceedings.^[27] It supports cross-cultural analysis by providing a reversible scheme that preserves linguistic nuances, as seen in journals such as the Journal of South Asian and Middle Eastern Studies, which apply ALA-LC for titles and author names from relevant scripts.^[28] Within library science education, ALA-LC principles are integrated into cataloging curricula at accredited programs, training future professionals in handling multilingual metadata for global collections.^[29] Adaptations of ALA-LC in publishing often involve simplified forms that omit diacritics to enhance readability for general audiences, while retaining core consonants and vowels; this approach is common in trade books but less so in peer-reviewed works.^[30] The system's influence extends to major style guides, including the 18th edition of the Chicago Manual of Style (2024), which incorporates updated ALA-LC-based rules for scripts like Korean to align with evolving digital publishing needs.^[31] The British Library's adoption of ALA-LC tables in 1975 for languages such as Russian marked a pivotal expansion, harmonizing practices across European academic presses and fostering transatlantic consistency in bibliographic romanization. Post-2020, ALA-LC has gained prominence in open-access journals for standardizing global metadata, aiding discoverability of multilingual content in platforms like Project MUSE, where romanized titles from non-Latin scripts improve search interoperability without relying on original alphabets.^[32] This shift reflects broader digital trends toward machine-readable transliterations, building on cataloging foundations to support inclusive scholarly communication.^[33]

Romanization Tables

Overview of Covered Scripts

The ALA-LC romanization tables encompass over 70 distinct schemes as of 2025, providing transliteration guidelines for a wide array of non-Roman scripts used in library cataloging and bibliographic control.^[34] These tables support romanization for scripts across major linguistic families, prioritizing those relevant to collections held by major research libraries, such as the Library of Congress. While not exhaustive for every world language, the coverage focuses on scripts with significant representation in scholarly and institutional materials, ensuring consistent access to diverse global resources.^[1] The tables are categorized by script family to reflect their structural characteristics and historical development. Alphabetic scripts, such as Greek, are addressed with schemes that map individual letters to Roman equivalents while preserving phonetic distinctions. Abjad scripts, exemplified by Arabic and Hebrew, emphasize consonant representation with diacritics for vowels where necessary. Abugida systems, like Devanagari used for Hindi and Sanskrit, involve consonant-vowel combinations rendered through systematic syllable-based transliteration. Syllabic scripts, including Japanese kana, convert moraic units into Roman forms that maintain readability and pronunciation fidelity. Additional categories cover syllabaries like Cherokee and complex systems such as Chinese characters via a Pinyin variant adapted for cataloging purposes.^[34]^[1] Coverage includes Semitic languages (e.g., Arabic, Hebrew, Amharic), Indic languages (e.g., Hindi, Tamil, Bengali), East Asian languages (e.g., Chinese, Japanese, Korean, Tibetan), Cyrillic-based languages (e.g., Russian, Bulgarian, Kazakh), and others such as Georgian, Armenian, Thai, and Khmer. Recent expansions have addressed minority languages, with additions including the ADLaM script for West African languages approved in 2023, and a revised table for Balinese approved in 2025 to accommodate growing collections of Southeast Asian materials.^[35]^[36]^[1] Gaps persist in certain areas, notably African scripts beyond Ethiopic (for Amharic, Tigré, and Tigrinya), though post-2010 additions like ADLaM and ongoing proposals indicate gradual broader inclusion.^[34] These tables have been accessible online through the Library of Congress website since the late 1990s, initially via scanned versions of the 1997 edition and evolving into downloadable PDFs for practical use in cataloging workflows.^[1] This digital availability has facilitated widespread adoption while allowing for periodic revisions through collaborative processes involving the Library of Congress and the American Library Association.^[7]

Examples from Major Scripts

The ALA-LC romanization system applies distinct rules to major scripts, ensuring consistent representation in library cataloging and bibliographic contexts. For Arabic script, the word "القرآن" (al-Qurʾān) illustrates the handling of the definite article "al-", the medial hamza (ء) as an apostrophe (ʾ), and the long vowel ā from alif (ا), while tāʾ marbūṭah (ة) is generally rendered as h in pause form or t in construct state, though not present here.^[37] This example demonstrates reversibility, as the romanized form "al-Qurʾān" allows reconstruction of the original Arabic script through one-to-one mapping of key elements like q for ق and r for ر.^[37] In Chinese, which uses ideographic characters, ALA-LC follows the Pinyin system, romanizing "北京" as "Beijing" without tone marks, as tones are omitted in bibliographic use for simplicity.^[38] For Russian Cyrillic, the place name "Москва" becomes "Moskva"; the letter ё is romanized as ë with a diaeresis, as in "ёлка" becoming "ëlka," prioritizing consistent transliteration.^[39] Hebrew romanization omits niqqud (vowel points) unless explicitly present in the source, rendering "תורה" simply as "Torah" based on modern Israeli pronunciation, with ת as t, ו as o (inferred vowel), ר as r, and ה as h.^[22] The 2025 update to the Balinese table, aligned with ISO 15919 principles, revises diacritics for greater precision; for instance, "ᬧᬮᬶ" is romanized as "Bali," using revised forms like middle dot (·) for vowel suppressants and macrons for long vowels (ā, ī).^[36] These examples highlight how ALA-LC balances phonetic accuracy with practical utility across scripts, often referencing general diacritic rules for consistency.^[1]

References

[1]
ALA-LC Romanization Tables - The Library of Congress
Aug 5, 2025 · The ALA-LC Romanization Tables: Transliteration Schemes for Non-Roman Scripts, is approved by the Library of Congress and the American Library Association.ALA-LC Romanization Tables
[2]
ALA-LC romanization tables : transliteration schemes for non ...
Oct 25, 2019 · ALA-LC romanization tables : transliteration schemes for non-Roman scripts. 239 p. ; 28 cm. Some tables originally published in: Cataloging service bulletin.
[3]
[PDF] The 1997 edition of ALA-LC Romanization Tables contains 54 ...
ALA-LC Romanization Tables provides special guidelines for capitalization and word division for certain scripts. Development of ALA-LC Romanization Tables.
[4]
Kazakh, Lepcha, and Manchu Romanization Tables
Sep 14, 2012 · The Kazakh (in Arabic script), Lepcha, and Manchu romanization tables are now available for downloading from the ALA-LC Romanization Tables webpage.
[5]
Romanization - Chinese Research and Bibliographic Methods for ...
Dec 13, 2024 · ALA-LC rules are standards for romanization, or the representation of text in other writing systems using the Latin alphabet developed by ...
[6]
[PDF] Korean Rŏmaniz'atiŏn: Is It Finally Time for The Library Of Congress ...
Some history on WG and pinyin; before the late 20th century, the most widespread. Romanization scheme in China was the WG, which was adopted by the Library of ...
[7]
[PDF] scat-news-38.pdf - IFLA
Dec 9, 2012 · An Introduction to the ALA-LC. Romanization Tables. Bruce Chr. Johnson, Library of Congress ... LC's Policy and Standards Division. How ALA ...<|separator|>
[8]
ALA-LC Romanization Tables Approved - Library of Congress
The Cham, Mande languages in N'ko script, and Uighur romanization tables are now available for downloading from the ALA-LC Romanization Tables webpage.Missing: history 1885
[9]
Revised Procedural Guidelines for Proposed New or Revised ...
Mar 25, 2024 · Any future ALA/LC Romanization Tables should enable machine-transliteration as much as possible and preferably reversible transliteration. Any ...
[10]
Source Documents for Romanization Tables - Library of Congress
Aug 5, 2025 · This page provides Microsoft Word source files from which the ALA-LC romanization tables are created. The fonts needed to properly display and edit are listed ...Missing: integration 2010s
[11]
[PDF] draft - ALA Institutional Repository
Jun 15, 2010 · Principle/Goals: • The ALA/LC Romanization Tables should be transliteration schemes rather than replicating pronunciation.Missing: principles | Show results with:principles
[12]
[PDF] Revised Procedural Guidelines for Proposed New or ... - ALAIR
Dec 6, 2020 · In order to help facilitate the approval process of new or revised Romanization tables, the Library of. Congress (LC), the Committee on ...
[13]
None
### Summary of ALA-LC Romanization Tables Introduction
[14]
Romanization Landscape - Library of Congress
3. Korean (in development). Other 1. Classical Greek 2. Chinese Wade-Giles ... ALA-LC Romanization Tables. Last Updated: 10/2/2018. Stay Connected with the ...
[15]
[PDF] 5JSC/LC/5/ALA response - RDA Toolkit
Mar 24, 2006 · ALA welcomes that the LC proposal eliminates the term “romanization”. We would prefer that the term “transliteration ... term in the RDA glossary ...Missing: terminology | Show results with:terminology
[16]
LAC practice - Original RDA Toolkit
LAC practice: In general, transcribe letters as they appear in the source. However, convert earlier forms of letters and earlier forms of diacritical marks ...
[17]
BIBCO Core Record Standards - PCC - Library of Congress
Oct 1, 2010 · ... AACR2 form using ALA/LC romanization rules. Whether the non-Latin equivalents of headings are added as references to the authority record or ...
[18]
[PDF] PCC Guidelines for Creating Bibliographic Records in Multiple ...
May 3, 2010 · For example, ALA-LC Romanization Tables calls for omitting a terminal hard sign “ъ” in Russian (pre-revolutionary (1917) script). For Bulgarian, ...<|control11|><|separator|>
[19]
MARC 21 Format for Bibliographic Data: 880 - The Library of Congress
Apr 1, 2008 · Field 880 represents a content-designated representation of another field in a different script, linked by subfield $6. It may be in multiple ...Missing: parallel | Show results with:parallel
[20]
Character Sets: UCS/Unicode Environment: MARC 21 ...
Dec 4, 2007 · ... UTF-8 is the only Unicode encoding form currently permitted in MARC 21. ... Combining marks (diacritics). Unicode requires that separately ...
[21]
Library systems and Unicode: a review of the current state of ... - Gale
Currently, the encoding of MARC records is limited to UTF-8 by MARC 21 ... (6) Unicode was approved for encoding MARC records in 1998. The MARBI ...
[22]
Guidelines for contributing non-Latin script bibliographic records to ...
Aug 15, 2023 · Romanized data - If you provide romanized (Latin-script-equivalent) data, romanization should follow guidelines in the ALA - LC Romanization ...
[23]
[PDF] Hebrew and Yiddish romanization table - The Library of Congress
The following romanization table attempts to represent the sound of Hebrew or Yiddish words but is applicable to all Hebraic languages. For Hebrew ...
[24]
ALA-LC Romanization Tables - Library of Congress
Description: Discontinued print publication. Available in Cataloger's Desktop. See http://www.loc.gov/cds/desktop/ The definitive transliteration guide ...
[25]
[PDF] Original Script Cataloging at the Library of Congress
Nov 17, 2017 · ▫ Development of the ALA-LC Romanization Tables. Page 6. Original Script Cataloging. 6. Classic LC Catalog Card for a Non-Latin Work. Page 7 ...
[26]
[PDF] The Chicago Manual of Style - Platforma Czasopism KUL
Sep 13, 2023 · For alphabetic conversion, the most comprehensive resource is the Library of Congress publica tion ALA-LC Romanization Tables (bibliog. 5), ...
[27]
Middle East and Islamic Studies Library Resources: Romanization
Oct 21, 2025 · Romanization refers to the process of representing non-Latin or vernacular scripts into Roman (Latin) Alphabet. Transliteration, on the other ...
[28]
Using Transliteration Tables | Glocal Notes - Publish
Feb 21, 2014 · Transliteration tables are one of the most important research tools for scholars working in international and area studies to master.
[29]
Journal of South Asian and Middle Eastern Studies
The Journal of South Asian and Middle Eastern Studies (JSAMES) is a quarterly, peer-reviewed journal sponsored by Villanova University's Center for Arab and ...<|separator|>
[30]
ALA-Accredited Programs - American Library Association
These programs offer degrees with names such as Master of Library Science (MLS), Master of Arts, Master of Librarianship, Master of Library and Information ...Searchable Database · Historical list of accredite · Get the PDF of Current...
[31]
Box 6, Names in non-roman alphabets (Cyrillic, Greek ... - NCBI
Romanization, a form of transliteration, means using the roman (Latin) alphabet to represent the letters or characters of another alphabet.Missing: definition | Show results with:definition<|control11|><|separator|>
[32]
What's New in the 18th Edition - The Chicago Manual of Style
New coverage of Korean romanization. 11.119. New guidance on South Asian capitalization for transliterated text. Chapter 12: Quotations and Dialogue. Note ...Missing: ALA- LC
[33]
Romanization of Russian - Wikipedia
American Library Association and Library of Congress (ALA-LC) romanization ... American libraries and in the British Library since 1975. The formal ...BGN/PCGN system · Wikipedia:Romanization of... · Jcuken · Russian Latin alphabet
[34]
Dealing with Multilingualism and Non-English Content in Open ...
Sep 20, 2024 · In the Global North, this single form has always been romanized; see, for instance, the ALA-LC romanization tables (Barry, Library of Congress, ...
[35]
CC:DA/M/1556 ALA-LC Romanization Table Review Update
The Romanization efforts moving forward should be machine-friendly. This is necessary for key bibliographic data and linked data purposes, especially as this ...Missing: Unicode integration post- 2020<|control11|><|separator|>
[36]
[PDF] Index of Languages
This index lists the names of languages and scripts covered by the ALA-LC Romanization Tables. If the language or script is covered by a romanization table ...
[37]
[PDF] Balinese Romanization Table 2025 version 2025
The Balinese script consists of a core inventory of consonant graphemes (corresponding to native phonemes in the Balinese language), two sets of additional.
[38]
[PDF] Arabic romanization table 2012 version
For the use of alif to support hamzah, see rule 2. For the romanization of hamzah by the consonantal sign ' (alif), see rule 8(a).
[39]
[PDF] Chinese romanization table 2012
ALA-LC romanization of ideographic characters used for the Chinese language follows the principles of the Pinyin (“spell sound”) system.Missing: history | Show results with:history
[40]
[PDF] Russian romanization table 2012
The letters І, Ѣ, Ѳ and Ѵ were eliminated in the orthographic reform of 1918. For other obsolete letters appearing in Russian texts, consult the Church Slavic ...Missing: 1904 | Show results with:1904