ODC,
Nice observation, I have been just repeating the typo without paying attention. I felt something is weird about the spelling but didn't notice the typo! Thank you. I have never been good at "Penglish".
On the other hand, Your arguments about the "current generation" of Arabic Script is valid and correct, but still misses the point:
In the context of the locale document that has been the initial starting point for this discussion, Arabic Script is not considered from a linguistic history and evolution point of view. In that respect Kufi and Naskhi distinctions are quite valid. But it is not what we are talking about here.
Let me give a concrete example.
Russian and Tajik are written in Cyrillic script [1].
English and Turkish are written in Roman script.
Persian and Arabic are written in (fill this with the correct word) script.
So far, we have these suggestions (in Penglish): "Farsi", "Naskh", "Arabi".
I disagree with "Farsi" because it does not cover other family members. I accept that as a common mistake, informally people would call any script that resembles theirs as being Persian, but I don't know whether this should be accepted as the formal name as well. Also, some people argued that Arabic and Persian are different scripts. I don't want to go into that argument. From a pragmatic point of view, I am pointing out that the locale document is talking about a name that can be correctly used in the above context (when we are talking about the similarity of Arabic and Persian not their difference).
I disagree with "Naskh" because it is easily confused with calligraphic style (the word is mostly used in that context if it appears after the word "Khatt"). Also it identifies the script from a different dimension/perspective than what is intended here.
I can live with "Arabi" [2] but I don't really like it. Look at the other two examples above, Roman or Cyrillic on themselves are identifiable as being script names but Arabic is not. That is why I am still asking people to bring up new ideas.
- Hooman Mehr
[1] Script covers more than just alphabet (things like writing direction, baseline, etc) but should never be confused with language. Languages written with the same script may be totally unrelated. Also the same language may be written using different scripts in different regions, like Persian and its close cousin Tajik.
[2] "Arabi" qualifies because it is the name of the language whose script is the root of the script used by the intended family of languages.
On Jun 11, 2004, at 8:09 PM, Ordak D. Coward wrote:
I am confused! Why people spell "khaat" with two a's? First I though it is a typo, but it seems everybody is writing it like that.
Anyway, I think most people in Iran call the writing sytem "khatt e faarsi" even if to refers to an Arabic text.
Furthermore, I still believe that "khatt e koofee" is not just a font,
as it was very different from later "khatt"s. There are lots of real
samples at: http://www.mnh.si.edu/epigraphy/english_version/html/e_islamic.htm
What makes "khatt e koofee" different from the current writing system
is the number of characters. Another way of looking at it is to
consider Kufi script a script where letters do not have dots. In my
opinion, this by itself makes Kufi a different 'script' than modern
Arabic.
Now, I guess my original suggestion of "Naskh" is technically correct, if the following can add any weight to that choice: http://www.ancientscripts.com/arabic.html http://www.britannica.com/eb/article?eu=56293
Notice that "khatt e naskh" is called "Naskhi script" in English.
-- ODC
On Fri, 11 Jun 2004 14:46:37 +0430, Hooman Mehr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Jun 11, 2004, at 9:01 AM, Peyman wrote:
Conclusion: You can say that the origin of our alphabet is Arabic but
you can not claim that our writing system is Arabic. Our writing
system is Persian "khaat e farsi". It is what my teacher Dr. Safavi as
a linguist says in his book and what I also say as a linguist.
Yes, sure. There is no argument with that. The only argument is what "Arabic Script" means in the context of Locale document. In that context, we are not talking about "Khaat e Farsi" but the name of the family of writing systems which are based on Arabic alphabet and its rules. Anybody with access to linguist know of a short common Persian term to use for "the family of writing systems that use and extend Arabic alphabet and its basic rules". I don't think they call the quoted phrase "Khaat e Farsi". "Khaat e Farsi" is a member of that group.
- Hooman Mehr
_______________________________________________ PersianComputing mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.sharif.edu/mailman/listinfo/persiancomputing
_______________________________________________ PersianComputing mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.sharif.edu/mailman/listinfo/persiancomputing
_______________________________________________ PersianComputing mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.sharif.edu/mailman/listinfo/persiancomputing
