logoalt Hacker News

littlekeylast Tuesday at 9:29 PM6 repliesview on HN

Surely "naan" would have been a way better transliteration choice than "non", right?


Replies

iLemmingyesterday at 5:42 PM

No, in Uzbek it is actually "non" and not "naan", "palov" and not "pilav", "somsa" and not "samosa", "tandir" and not "tandoor".

alex000kimyesterday at 2:11 AM

No, Uzbeks themselves use “non” when using Latin alphabet. Fun fact: in the past Uzbek language has been written in arabic, cyrillic, and, since ~2018, in latin.

Source: grew up there

roncesvallesyesterday at 12:05 AM

1. English transliteration has its own cultural inertia. It's not just about what's most phonetically sensible (that too only for some particular English region: how an American phonetizes non would be different from how a Brit or Aussie would).

2. Don't assume the Uzbeks say this word the same way as the Indians do. It may very well sound closer to "non" in Uzbekistan.

show 1 reply
debo_last Tuesday at 10:29 PM

It seems like a non issue to me.

walrus01yesterday at 1:43 AM

I got a job at the local Uzbek restaurant, but before I could learn all the recipes and secret ingredients, I had to sign a naan disclosure agreement.

shrxlast Tuesday at 9:58 PM

Probbly a deliberate choice to distinguish it from its Indian sibling?