On Sat, 12 Jun 2004 12:14:40 +0430, Hooman Mehr [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
More clarifications, questions and opinions:
1) Clarification: Are we talking English or Persian?
a) The English name of the concept in the locale document is Arabic
Script and it is not up to us to discuss or change
On Thu, 2004-06-10 at 10:26, Hooman Mehr wrote:
If we don't like the Arabic word, we may substitute something like
Islamic and call it Islamic Script. I don't mean to give it any
religious weight, but just substituting the physical origin (Arabia)
by culture that carried along this script into
On Thu, 2004-06-10 at 12:32, Behdad Esfahbod wrote:
Don't know why, but it reminds me of the Persian vs. Farsi
problem...
BTW, I just got my hand on the proceedings of The First Workshop on
Persian Language and Computer, which took place on May 25 and 26 in the
Faculty of Literature and
On Fri, 2004-06-11 at 20:31, C Bobroff wrote:
I believe Roozbeh, while typing the document was attempting to translate
Perso-Arabic script into Persian. Not an easy job.
No, I was translating Arabic script into Persian.
roozbeh
___
PersianComputing
On Fri, 2004-06-11 at 09:01, 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
On Sat, 2004-06-12 at 19:04, Roozbeh Pournader wrote:
Since you are a linguist, I wish to refer you to a linguistic text,
Daniels and Bright's The World's Writing Systems, Oxford University
Press, 1996, ISBN 0195079930. Please read Section 50, Arabic Writing.
... and section 62, Adaptation of
On Fri, 11 Jun 2004, 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
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
On Fri, 11 Jun 2004, Ordak D. Coward wrote:
I am confused! [snip]
Gang, I'm afraid this conversation is like a boat which has come loose
from its moorings and is now lost on the high seas straying where the four
winds will take it.
I believe Roozbeh, while typing the document was attempting to
Hooman Mehr [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote
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
C Bobroff wrote:
I believe Roozbeh, while typing the document was attempting to translate
Perso-Arabic script into Persian. Not an easy job. I recommend for the
final draft, you say khatt-e 'arabi and then in parentheses or footnote,
just put the English (Perso-Arabic script). I don't think that
On Fri, 11 Jun 2004, Ali A Khanban wrote:
The first time we
tried to approach High Council of Informatics showraaye aaliye
anformaatik to discuss a Unicode proposal, they were against using
Unicode, just because the letters were named Arabic letter They
were of course mistaken, and it
, 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
The book can very easily be biased. The sentence ...
dastkhosh-e taghiraati besiaar jaaleb shod, ke neshaangar-e
aagaahi-e iraaniaan az daanesh-e zabaansheniaasi ast. is far
from justified.
Don't know why, but it reminds me of the Persian vs. Farsi
problem...
On Wed, 9 Jun 2004, Peyman wrote:
Thanks a lot Hooman for clarification.
Also about the attachment we saw, note that Naskh, Nasta'liq,
Koofi, etc are all different calligraphic styles of the same
Arabic script. So even the attachment saying khatt-e naskh ...
khatt-e faarsi naam gerefti is completely non-sense here.
There are
1968).
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.
Just let me know if
Well, it shows that there exists something which is called xatte
Faarsi. Not everything in our constitution is fiction, is it? ;)
-ali-
Peyman wrote:
The attached .jpg is a text from the book pishineye zabane farsi
written by Dr. Safavi.
Peyman
*/Behdad Esfahbod [EMAIL PROTECTED]/* wrote:
17 matches
Mail list logo
