There are 14 messages in this issue.
Topics in this digest:
1.1. Re: Diacritics
From: J. 'Mach' Wust
1.2. Re: Diacritics
From: R A Brown
1.3. Re: Diacritics
From: J. 'Mach' Wust
1.4. Re: Diacritics
From: Adam Walker
1.5. Re: Diacritics
From: Patrick Dunn
1.6. Re: Diacritics
From: Adam Walker
1.7. Re: Diacritics
From: Patrick Dunn
1.8. Re: Diacritics
From: Lars Finsen
1.9. Re: Diacritics
From: Adam Walker
1.10. Re: Diacritics
From: Patrick Dunn
1.11. Script(tural) confusion (was: Diacritics)
From: R A Brown
2. neoslavonic language - novoslovienskij jazyk
From: Vojtěch Merunka
3. Work-in-Progress: Dritok Primer
From: Donald Boozer
4. OT: Chinglish.
From: Lars Finsen
Messages
________________________________________________________________________
1.1. Re: Diacritics
Posted by: "J. 'Mach' Wust" j_mach_w...@yahoo.com
Date: Wed Dec 1, 2010 7:57 am ((PST))
On Wed, 1 Dec 2010 01:53:59 -0000, Charlie <caeruleancent...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>--- In conlang@yahoogroups.com, "J. 'Mach' Wust" <j_mach_w...@...> wrote:
>>
>> My point is that there is a correlation between scripts and
>> scriptures in modern Western and Middle Eastern societies, but there
>> wasn't in ancient times.
>
>Is there no correlation between the Hebrew scriptures and the Aramaic/Hebrew
>alphabets, the Zend-avesta and the Pahlavi script, the Vedas and the Devanagari
>alphabet?
Not really. In ancient times, much of the Hebrew scriptures were originally
written in the Old Hebrew script, but later on in an Aramaic-based script,
but that script did not remain plain Aramaic, but changed into what is now
the "modern" Hebrew script. There is no correlation between the Vedic
Scriptures and the devanagari script. In Southern India, they were not
written in the devanagari script, but in Southern Indic alphabets.
Of course, alphabets were adapted to other languages in Ancient times, but
they tended to change into new scripts in the process of adaption. I guess
the reason for that was that there were no Scriptures that would conserve
the script.
--
grüess
mach
Messages in this topic (45)
________________________________________________________________________
1.2. Re: Diacritics
Posted by: "R A Brown" r...@carolandray.plus.com
Date: Wed Dec 1, 2010 9:29 am ((PST))
On 01/12/2010 11:31, Lars Finsen wrote:
> Den 1. des. 2010 kl. 09.03 skrev R A Brown:
>
[snip]
>
> This implies, I guess, that the Homeric texts known and
> used by the Athenians were not in their own version of
> the alphabet, but in that Ionian one. After all, Homer
> was Ionian. If the Athenians had had a distinct letter
> for "aitch", they could have dragged that along, but
> apparently it (the "heta") was identical in form to the
> Ionian "eta".
Before the Athenians adopted the Ionian alphabet it did
indeed have "heta" which, as far as the character goes (not
the value) was the same as "eta." During the change over,
as the Ionian gradually replaced local form, we do
occasionally find inscriptions in which _H_ is used with
both values.
What I meant is that by the Alexandrian period, the Athenian
Homeric canon had become the accepted one among the Greeks.
> This explains why the capital eta looks so much like an
> H. Some of the colonies in Italy were ionian, but not
> all. Hades in the pre-403 Athenian script would look like
> Ηαδες, I guess - no letter for long e (and no accents).
Yep.
--------------------------------------------------
On 01/12/2010 12:17, Ph.D. wrote:
> I don't mean to be critical, but shouldn't this be "canon"?
Yes, it should! Thanks.
---------------------------------------------------
On 01/12/2010 15:52, J. 'Mach' Wust wrote:
> On Wed, 1 Dec 2010 01:53:59 -0000,
> Charlie<caeruleancent...@yahoo.com> wrote:
[snip]
>> Is there no correlation between the Hebrew scriptures
>> and the Aramaic/Hebrew alphabets, the Zend-avesta and
>> the Pahlavi script, the Vedas and the Devanagari
>> alphabet?
>
> Not really. In ancient times, much of the Hebrew
> scriptures were originally written in the Old Hebrew
> script, but later on in an Aramaic-based script, but that
> script did not remain plain Aramaic, but changed into
> what is now the "modern" Hebrew script.
Humph! This looks to me a bit like bending facts to fit a
theory. Of course the earliest Hebrew scriptures were
written in the Old Hebrew alphabet (very similar to the
Phoenician); later writings were in Aramaic. But in the
post-exilic period the scriptures came to be compiled and
standardized and written in the "square Hebrew" characters
that the Jews have been using for more some two and half
millennia now. In the minds of the Masoretes and others
there was certainly a correlation between script and
scriptures. Good grief! The Kabbalah is developed largely
from this correlation.
Lars alludes to the fact that Homer was originally written
in local scripts and, indeed, almost certainly had variant
forms of text (In the 19th century some scholars attempted
to retrieve the "original" together with old letter _vau_).
But eventually, because of the pre-eminence of Athens the
Athenian canon, written in the Ionian alphabet, became the
recognized "authorized version." It was that version that
the Alexandrians preserved and for which they developed
various diacritics so that:
- Homer could be read correctly;
- the _script_ of the text could be preserved in the
authorized form.
[snip]
>
> Of course, alphabets were adapted to other languages in
> Ancient times, but they tended to change into new scripts
> in the process of adaption. I guess the reason for that
> was that there were no Scriptures that would conserve the
> script.
You do NOT need scriptures to conserve a script! It is well
known that Emperor Claudius added three extra letters to the
Roman alphabets; and inscriptions can be found with them on.
But these letters did not survive his reign - not because of
any scriptures (and certainly the Latin scriptures can't be
blamed for it!!). I guess the reason they were dropped was
good ol' plain conservatism.
--
Ray
==================================
http://www.carolandray.plus.com
==================================
"Ein Kopf, der auf seine eigene Kosten denkt,
wird immer Eingriffe in die Sprache thun."
[J.G. Hamann, 1760]
"A mind that thinks at its own expense
will always interfere with language".
Messages in this topic (45)
________________________________________________________________________
1.3. Re: Diacritics
Posted by: "J. 'Mach' Wust" j_mach_w...@yahoo.com
Date: Wed Dec 1, 2010 11:06 am ((PST))
On Wed, 1 Dec 2010 17:25:43 +0000, R A Brown <r...@carolandray.plus.com> wrote:
>Of course the earliest Hebrew scriptures were
>written in the Old Hebrew alphabet (very similar to the
>Phoenician); later writings were in Aramaic. But in the
>post-exilic period the scriptures came to be compiled and
>standardized and written in the "square Hebrew" characters
>that the Jews have been using for more some two and half
>millennia now. In the minds of the Masoretes and others
>there was certainly a correlation between script and
>scriptures.
I think you have not really understood my point. Within one language, there
is quite obviously always a correlation between the script and anything
written in it. I am talking about single scripts that are used for different
languages. For instance the "square" Hebrew script: There is a number of
languages that are written in square Hebrew script because of their
connection with the Hebrew religious scriptures. The script has been adapted
from one language to another because of the religion.
--
grüess
mach
Messages in this topic (45)
________________________________________________________________________
1.4. Re: Diacritics
Posted by: "Adam Walker" carra...@gmail.com
Date: Wed Dec 1, 2010 3:31 pm ((PST))
On Wed, Dec 1, 2010 at 1:00 PM, J. 'Mach' Wust <j_mach_w...@yahoo.com>wrote:
> There is a number of
> languages that are written in square Hebrew script because of their
> connection with the Hebrew religious scriptures. The script has been
> adapted
> from one language to another because of the religion.
>
> What? which other languages are written in Hebrew square? Not even
Samaritan fits the bill to my knowledge. Oh, wait, you're meaning Yiddish
and Ladino and the like. I wouldn't count them in quite the same category
for this discussion.
Adam
Messages in this topic (45)
________________________________________________________________________
1.5. Re: Diacritics
Posted by: "Patrick Dunn" pwd...@gmail.com
Date: Wed Dec 1, 2010 5:08 pm ((PST))
And Aramaic
On Wed, Dec 1, 2010 at 5:18 PM, Adam Walker <carra...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 1, 2010 at 1:00 PM, J. 'Mach' Wust <j_mach_w...@yahoo.com
> >wrote:
>
> > There is a number of
> > languages that are written in square Hebrew script because of their
> > connection with the Hebrew religious scriptures. The script has been
> > adapted
> > from one language to another because of the religion.
> >
> > What? which other languages are written in Hebrew square? Not even
> Samaritan fits the bill to my knowledge. Oh, wait, you're meaning Yiddish
> and Ladino and the like. I wouldn't count them in quite the same category
> for this discussion.
>
>
> Adam
>
--
I have stretched ropes from steeple to steeple; garlands from window to
window; golden chains from star to star, and I dance. --Arthur Rimbaud
Messages in this topic (45)
________________________________________________________________________
1.6. Re: Diacritics
Posted by: "Adam Walker" carra...@gmail.com
Date: Wed Dec 1, 2010 6:23 pm ((PST))
No Aramaic has its own script.
On 12/1/10, Patrick Dunn <pwd...@gmail.com> wrote:
> And Aramaic
>
> On Wed, Dec 1, 2010 at 5:18 PM, Adam Walker <carra...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Dec 1, 2010 at 1:00 PM, J. 'Mach' Wust <j_mach_w...@yahoo.com
>> >wrote:
>>
>> > There is a number of
>> > languages that are written in square Hebrew script because of their
>> > connection with the Hebrew religious scriptures. The script has been
>> > adapted
>> > from one language to another because of the religion.
>> >
>> > What? which other languages are written in Hebrew square? Not even
>> Samaritan fits the bill to my knowledge. Oh, wait, you're meaning Yiddish
>> and Ladino and the like. I wouldn't count them in quite the same category
>> for this discussion.
>>
>>
>> Adam
>>
>
>
>
> --
> I have stretched ropes from steeple to steeple; garlands from window to
> window; golden chains from star to star, and I dance. --Arthur Rimbaud
>
Messages in this topic (45)
________________________________________________________________________
1.7. Re: Diacritics
Posted by: "Patrick Dunn" pwd...@gmail.com
Date: Wed Dec 1, 2010 6:31 pm ((PST))
At one time it had. But Biblical Aramaic is now written in the same script
as Hebrew. Look at the Book of Daniel some time in the original: part in
Hebrew, part in Aramaic, all in the same script. At least, in my B. H. it
is.
I don't know what this proves or fails to prove in re: the original
argument, since I don't really *understand* the original argument.
On Wed, Dec 1, 2010 at 8:19 PM, Adam Walker <carra...@gmail.com> wrote:
> No Aramaic has its own script.
>
> On 12/1/10, Patrick Dunn <pwd...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > And Aramaic
> >
> > On Wed, Dec 1, 2010 at 5:18 PM, Adam Walker <carra...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On Wed, Dec 1, 2010 at 1:00 PM, J. 'Mach' Wust <j_mach_w...@yahoo.com
> >> >wrote:
> >>
> >> > There is a number of
> >> > languages that are written in square Hebrew script because of their
> >> > connection with the Hebrew religious scriptures. The script has been
> >> > adapted
> >> > from one language to another because of the religion.
> >> >
> >> > What? which other languages are written in Hebrew square? Not even
> >> Samaritan fits the bill to my knowledge. Oh, wait, you're meaning
> Yiddish
> >> and Ladino and the like. I wouldn't count them in quite the same
> category
> >> for this discussion.
> >>
> >>
> >> Adam
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > I have stretched ropes from steeple to steeple; garlands from window to
> > window; golden chains from star to star, and I dance. --Arthur Rimbaud
> >
>
--
I have stretched ropes from steeple to steeple; garlands from window to
window; golden chains from star to star, and I dance. --Arthur Rimbaud
Messages in this topic (45)
________________________________________________________________________
1.8. Re: Diacritics
Posted by: "Lars Finsen" lars.fin...@ortygia.no
Date: Wed Dec 1, 2010 8:23 pm ((PST))
Jörg Rhiemeier wrote:
> quoting Roger Mills:
>
>> A language that would be helped with a diacritic (and used to be,
>> pre-1972) is Indonesian, which uses "e" for both schwa as well as
>> [e] and (rare, mostly conditioned) [E]. Formerly, [e,E] were marked
>> with an acute.
>
> I.e., the same way as in my conlang Roman Germanech
And the same way as in my natlang Norwegian, which additionally often
writes an _e_ even where there is no vowel at all, only a syllabic
consonant, mostly in the masculine definite endings, but also in the
demonstrative _den_, for example. This does not apply to all dialects.
LEF
Messages in this topic (45)
________________________________________________________________________
1.9. Re: Diacritics
Posted by: "Adam Walker" carra...@gmail.com
Date: Wed Dec 1, 2010 8:39 pm ((PST))
It still has. The only place I am aware of Hebrew square being used
to write Aramaic in in the Tanakh in those few passages that are not
in Hebrew. Aramaic is still spoken in daily life, still in use as a
liturgical language and written in its own script. I have the New
Testament in Aramaic in my storage building; it is not in Hebrew
square characters.
Adam
On 12/1/10, Patrick Dunn <pwd...@gmail.com> wrote:
> At one time it had. But Biblical Aramaic is now written in the same script
> as Hebrew. Look at the Book of Daniel some time in the original: part in
> Hebrew, part in Aramaic, all in the same script. At least, in my B. H. it
> is.
>
> I don't know what this proves or fails to prove in re: the original
> argument, since I don't really *understand* the original argument.
>
> On Wed, Dec 1, 2010 at 8:19 PM, Adam Walker <carra...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> No Aramaic has its own script.
>>
>> On 12/1/10, Patrick Dunn <pwd...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > And Aramaic
>> >
>> > On Wed, Dec 1, 2010 at 5:18 PM, Adam Walker <carra...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Wed, Dec 1, 2010 at 1:00 PM, J. 'Mach' Wust <j_mach_w...@yahoo.com
>> >> >wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > There is a number of
>> >> > languages that are written in square Hebrew script because of their
>> >> > connection with the Hebrew religious scriptures. The script has been
>> >> > adapted
>> >> > from one language to another because of the religion.
>> >> >
>> >> > What? which other languages are written in Hebrew square? Not even
>> >> Samaritan fits the bill to my knowledge. Oh, wait, you're meaning
>> Yiddish
>> >> and Ladino and the like. I wouldn't count them in quite the same
>> category
>> >> for this discussion.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Adam
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > I have stretched ropes from steeple to steeple; garlands from window to
>> > window; golden chains from star to star, and I dance. --Arthur Rimbaud
>> >
>>
>
>
>
> --
> I have stretched ropes from steeple to steeple; garlands from window to
> window; golden chains from star to star, and I dance. --Arthur Rimbaud
>
Messages in this topic (45)
________________________________________________________________________
1.10. Re: Diacritics
Posted by: "Patrick Dunn" pwd...@gmail.com
Date: Wed Dec 1, 2010 8:57 pm ((PST))
It would be more accurate to say that Hebrew is written in the Aramaic
alphabet, or at least, an early version of it. Imperial Aramaic has a
somewhat different alphabet, but it's not hard to see the genetic
relationship to square Hebrew script.
As far as contemporary Aramaic, I'm guessing your NT is written in the
Estrangelo script, which displays than a little similarity to the script
currently used to write Hebrew. It's not much further from Square Hebrew
than handwritten "cursive" Hebrew is.
In a very real sense, nearly every alphabet is a version of the early
semitic alphabet that turned into all these scripts.
On Wed, Dec 1, 2010 at 10:36 PM, Adam Walker <carra...@gmail.com> wrote:
> It still has. The only place I am aware of Hebrew square being used
> to write Aramaic in in the Tanakh in those few passages that are not
> in Hebrew. Aramaic is still spoken in daily life, still in use as a
> liturgical language and written in its own script. I have the New
> Testament in Aramaic in my storage building; it is not in Hebrew
> square characters.
>
> Adam
>
> On 12/1/10, Patrick Dunn <pwd...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > At one time it had. But Biblical Aramaic is now written in the same
> script
> > as Hebrew. Look at the Book of Daniel some time in the original: part in
> > Hebrew, part in Aramaic, all in the same script. At least, in my B. H.
> it
> > is.
> >
> > I don't know what this proves or fails to prove in re: the original
> > argument, since I don't really *understand* the original argument.
> >
> > On Wed, Dec 1, 2010 at 8:19 PM, Adam Walker <carra...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> No Aramaic has its own script.
> >>
> >> On 12/1/10, Patrick Dunn <pwd...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > And Aramaic
> >> >
> >> > On Wed, Dec 1, 2010 at 5:18 PM, Adam Walker <carra...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> On Wed, Dec 1, 2010 at 1:00 PM, J. 'Mach' Wust <
> j_mach_w...@yahoo.com
> >> >> >wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> > There is a number of
> >> >> > languages that are written in square Hebrew script because of their
> >> >> > connection with the Hebrew religious scriptures. The script has
> been
> >> >> > adapted
> >> >> > from one language to another because of the religion.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > What? which other languages are written in Hebrew square? Not
> even
> >> >> Samaritan fits the bill to my knowledge. Oh, wait, you're meaning
> >> Yiddish
> >> >> and Ladino and the like. I wouldn't count them in quite the same
> >> category
> >> >> for this discussion.
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> Adam
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > I have stretched ropes from steeple to steeple; garlands from window
> to
> >> > window; golden chains from star to star, and I dance. --Arthur
> Rimbaud
> >> >
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > I have stretched ropes from steeple to steeple; garlands from window to
> > window; golden chains from star to star, and I dance. --Arthur Rimbaud
> >
>
--
I have stretched ropes from steeple to steeple; garlands from window to
window; golden chains from star to star, and I dance. --Arthur Rimbaud
Messages in this topic (45)
________________________________________________________________________
1.11. Script(tural) confusion (was: Diacritics)
Posted by: "R A Brown" r...@carolandray.plus.com
Date: Thu Dec 2, 2010 12:01 am ((PST))
On 02/12/2010 02:28, Patrick Dunn wrote:
> At one time it had. But Biblical Aramaic is now written
> in the same script as Hebrew. Look at the Book of Daniel
> some time in the original: part in Hebrew, part in
> Aramaic, all in the same script. At least, in my B. H.
> it is.
True.
> I don't know what this proves or fails to prove in re:
> the original argument, since I don't really *understand*
> the original argument.
I thought I understood the original argument - but I have
become confused now.
Besides - this particular sub-thread seems to have strayed a
long way from the topic "diacritics" - it seems now to be
dealing with various Semitic scripts ;)
------------------------------------------------
On 02/12/2010 04:36, Adam Walker wrote:
> It still has. The only place I am aware of Hebrew square
> being used to write Aramaic in in the Tanakh in those few
> passages that are not in Hebrew. Aramaic is still spoken
> in daily life, still in use as a liturgical language and
> written in its own script.
Also true - and also a long way from diacritics ;)
------------------------------------------------
On 01/12/2010 19:00, J. 'Mach' Wust wrote:
[snip]
> I think you have not really understood my point.
Probably not - I'm quite confused now.
I thought you had maintained that:
1. the Latin scriptures (i.e. the Vulgate) had inhibited the
development of extra letters in the Roman alphabet.
2. There had been no previous example of scriptures
affecting the development of a script.
I disagree with both premises and have explained why. The
only connexion with the original thread that I can see is
that the desire not to change the text of Homer but to show
how it should be read led to the Alexandrians developing a
system of diacritic.
As for the Roman alphabet, there is at least one notable
example of resistance to adding extra letters about three
centuries before the Vulgate had been authorized, and there
are early post-Vulgate examples of national versions of the
Roman alphabet adding extra letters.
As for diacritics, they abound and thrive in various
national versions of the Roman alphabet.
I doesn't seem we're going to agree, so I don't see any
point in dragging this out - unless, of course, we now
switch to discussing how Aramaic is written :)
--
Ray
==================================
http://www.carolandray.plus.com
==================================
"Ein Kopf, der auf seine eigene Kosten denkt,
wird immer Eingriffe in die Sprache thun."
[J.G. Hamann, 1760]
"A mind that thinks at its own expense
will always interfere with language".
Messages in this topic (45)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
2. neoslavonic language - novoslovienskij jazyk
Posted by: "Vojtěch Merunka" vmeru...@gmail.com
Date: Wed Dec 1, 2010 1:31 pm ((PST))
Dear conlangers,
This is info about the new zonal conlangue - neoslavonic. The language
is a modernization of the old (church) slavonic and it works! Both oral
and written form of this language is intelligible without learning.
This project is a successor of the first slavic conlangue Slovio, which
still evolves. Both languages have the same dictionary and both teams
collaborates. Slovio is a project with very minimalistic grammar
(considerably similar to Esperanto). Neoslavonic has full grammar (7
noun cases, 6 verbal tenses, ...) similar to current slavic languages,
but with small number of patterns almost without exceptions. There are
two different approaches to interslavic communication represented by
these two projects. Recently we started practical usage of these
languages. We will perform supporters meeting in Prague next August and
several master and doctoral thesis have been started as well. They are
on software applications (dictionaries, mobile devices, CMS) and
marketing/management opportinities (e.g. knowledge transfer and
facilitation of local business, turism, regional management, ... between
slavic regions within E.U.).
https://sites.google.com/site/novoslovienskij/youtube
the best
Vojta M.
the author
Messages in this topic (1)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
3. Work-in-Progress: Dritok Primer
Posted by: "Donald Boozer" donaldboo...@yahoo.com
Date: Wed Dec 1, 2010 8:10 pm ((PST))
At the risk of unveiling a not-ready-for-primetime project, I'm posting the
beginning lessons of my Dritok Primer online for everyone's amusement:
http://library.conlang.org/DritokPrimer.pdf
The booklet currently only has 7 lessons, an Appendix, Answers to Exercises,
and a Dritok-English glossary.
My goal (years from now, no doubt) is to convert it to a web site complete with
audio and video. But I'm going to need way more than 7 lessons for that to be
worthwhile.
Some of the information has been available previously, but this is a new
format. As I mentioned before, my inspiration was Carsten's Ayeri Grammar. I
remember finding his original several years ago, and his updated draft is even
more impressive. That grammar is one of the reasons I asked him to allow me to
include him in the Conlang Exhibit.
In any case, enjoy the project as it stands and I'll keep the list notified as
it moves along (sloowly, but, hopefully, surely).
h:.qs.p*.=D4/I1=D2;
Don
http://library.conlang.org
Twitter: @FiatLingua
Messages in this topic (1)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
4. OT: Chinglish.
Posted by: "Lars Finsen" lars.fin...@ortygia.no
Date: Thu Dec 2, 2010 5:36 am ((PST))
Hi,
I wonder if someone good at reading Chinese could help me with a
couple of sentences. I am translating some Chinglish, and it is a
little dense in a couple of places. As the original Chinese version
is there, too, it might help if someone could read or translate it
into English for me. I can pay through PayPal if you wish. (My
deadline is in one and a half hour.)
Greetings,
LEF
Messages in this topic (1)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/conlang/
<*> Your email settings:
Digest Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/conlang/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
conlang-nor...@yahoogroups.com
conlang-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
conlang-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
