Abdulhaq Lynch wrote: > I bring it up (and I stress, not in reaction to anyone or anything > particular in this list) because of how awful the orientalist version > of arabic grammar is, and I don't want anything similar to happen > here.
What do you think of AFL Beeston's approach? > The scriptural representation of the quran that we have now is a > direct representation of the rules of tajweed and these signs are > there as an aid to the reader to perform idghaam, iqlaab, ikhfaa, > madd, waqf etc. If we encode theses things as a small meem or a > phototastic quadrilateral lingo squirly then we've missed the whole > point and are putting a millstone around the neck of those who have > to use it. Encodings are abstractions that no user needs to be aware of. BTW, what is phototastic quadrilateral lingo? t _______________________________________________ General mailing list [email protected] http://lists.arabeyes.org/mailman/listinfo/general
