Hi there, Sokhan's dictionary is a first of its kind in Persian, since it gives the "definitions" of the words, rather than "synonyms", which earlier works did. So, despite its deficiencies, I think it is a useful starting point.
I understand Connie's point about the absence of vowels, etc., and I think that's an intrinsic problem for the learners of Persian, as usually "harakaat" are not written in Persian. The problem with encoding Persian into computer is rather fundamental though, as there is no standard yet, not even for use in every-day life, such as writing combinations (should we write a word like "bi-maaye" attached or separately? What about "bi-kaar"? ...). These are things that make things difficult in computer programs, especially for searching purposes. Please see a very well written article by Dr Masoumi-Hamedani in a recent issue of Nashr-e Danesh for this matter (don't have the exact reference). Yet another comment about making Persian dictionaries electronic (of course if somebody is up to it): there are now more progressive dictionaries than Aryanpour's, for example Hezareh, as it has more diversity in selecting word equivalents, and is more comprehensive. Best, Pedram On Thu, 3 Jun 2004, C Bobroff wrote: > On Thu, 3 Jun 2004, Pedram Safari wrote: > > > I do not know about pronunciation, but the dictionary at > > http://www.math.columbia.edu/~safari/dictionary/ > > (which was discussed above) is transliteration-based (using the so-called > > "mikhi" alphabet, available on the right side of the page), if that is > > what you want. It is platform-independent, as well as use-to-use > > (clickable). > > Pedram, > > Thanks but it's not what I need. > > First of all, I've actually been a *user* of this dictionary > especially a few years ago when it was one of the ONLY online Persian > dictionaries and I don't remember it ever being down or not working! > I even had to write a report for some governmental agency on the state > of online Persian materials in which I explained that on one hand this > sort of dictionary is really only for Persian speakers wanting to > learn English. Think of it: no vowels (harakat), no tashdid's. Is it > not absurd that a dictionary should have half the letters missing?! > On the other hand, due to the lack of textbooks with proper lists of > vocabulary, the poor beginning students of Persian are forced to waste > their time flipping through paper dictionaries which leads to fatigue > and they don't have any energy left to actually *learn* the words. > Therefore, I concluded this dictionary is much better than nothing at > all. My professor even asked me to find out exactly which dictionary > it was and that's how I came to know it was the Aryanpour "Concise > English-Persian dictionary" and had that answer at the ready when > Behdad asked the other day! > _______________________________________________ PersianComputing mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.sharif.edu/mailman/listinfo/persiancomputing
