Quantum redactiones paginae "Disputatio:Alphabetum Graecum" differant

Browse history interactively

← Differentia superior Differentia proxima →

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Emendatio ex 15:48, 14 Februarii 2010

Alphabet Audio

hello from Greece guys!

use this if you want>>

Formula:Listen

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:CuteHappyBrute

that's very helpful. thanks!

But that is the modern Greek alphabet there. We would need one for the classical alphabet too. --Xaverius 10:03, 5 Decembris 2009 (UTC)[reply]

All letters available in Unicode

All Classical letters, including all Epichoric letters are as follows:

All Epichoric letters are as follows:

Digamma, Stigma, Heta, Yot, San, Sho, Qoppa, Sampi.

All (Simple) English descriptions of these letters are available here:

http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greek_alphabet

All these letters are included in Unicode: http://unicode.org/charts/PDF/U0370.pdf

Some Epichoric letters are missing in Latin Wikipedia (red links in alphabet template), thus please add them. 91.94.132.212 15:51, 17 Iunii 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Quidam hanc imaginem in pagina ipsa misit cum adnotatione "complete sequence of letters to show alphabetical position of obsolete letters within Greek alphabetic sequence". Sed id impossibile est, quia

Haec litterae nullo tempore, unam aliam sequentes, omnes in alphabeto fuerunt;
Series harum litterarum rite ordinatarum minime exstat.

Igitur removi. Andrew Dalby 17:43, 24 Iunii 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Scho?

It seems highly unlikely that the ʃ sound is transliterated as sch in latin. How do you go from ʃ to sch? Even just plain s would be closer sounding. Is there a source for this or is it made up?--Rafaelgarcia 18:20, 23 Iunii 2008 (UTC)[reply]

According to en:wiki, the letter was used only in Bactrian (a long-extinct Iranian language, deciphered in 1957, which few mortals currently know). I quote: "The name "sho" is modern; its Bactrian name is unknown, as is its order in the Bactrian alphabet." I quote further from the paper by Michael Everson and Nicholas Sims-Williams, which is linked on that English page: "No traditional name is attested for this letter, but because of its similarity to RHO, the name SHO has been suggested here." This means, I would say, that sho is a fantasy-name, created by those two multitypographers purely for the reason that the Unicode people demand a name as well as a shape before they will consider new proposals for inclusion of characters in Unicode. It has nothing to do with God, Ms Emmerich, Adamic or Bactrian, and certainly nothing to do with Greek. Andrew Dalby 20:01, 23 Iunii 2008 (UTC)[reply]

So its part of the bactrian alphabet and not the greek one.--Rafaelgarcia 20:14, 23 Iunii 2008 (UTC)[reply]

So indeed it has nothing to do with Greek.--Rafaelgarcia 20:16, 23 Iunii 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly. If anyone wanted to write an article about the Bactrian alphabet, that's where it would find its obvious place. The Greek alphabet has other extended variants too (notably Coptic). Why the Bactrian variant has become so important in the scheme of things, God knows.

The following reference [1] was given by our anonymous editor and is really useful on variant Greek letters. I don't see a mention of "sho" there, but maybe I just failed to find it as yet.

I don't think there is a strong reason for excluding the variants from this page unless and until we have a better page for them. But it's dishonest to imply that letters were used for Greek when they weren't: our editors must try to guard against this. Andrew Dalby 20:33, 23 Iunii 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Where I was unable to confirm the name of one of the odd letters in early or classical Greek, I've asked for a citation; where I'm sure that there was no name, I've deleted it. In either case, a real citation (of an ancient Greek text) is what's needed. Andrew Dalby 21:17, 23 Iunii 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I replaced analogical dead external link set with analogical life external link set in main article to provide broadest ever centralized reference set available known to me. 83.30.143.131 14:27, 14 Februarii 2010 (UTC)[reply]

References

Here is useful bare reference link set, use it, because links in article are linking to defunct sites.

http://unicode.org/charts/PDF/U0370.pdf U0370.pdf
http://www.code2000.net

This set covers all existing Greek characters in both uppercase and lowercase forms along with all their codepoints. 209.104.195.64 15:12, 14 Februarii 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Anyone who finds these links useful could label them in Latin and add them to the page, but they would (I think) be appropriate rather on the pages about the individual characters. On this page links about the whole alphabet are more suitable. Andrew Dalby 15:16, 14 Februarii 2010 (UTC)[reply]

So why was he blocked for adding them? Pantocrator 15:18, 14 Februarii 2010 (UTC)[reply]

She's an obsessive who has been a minor nuisance on many Wikipedias for many years. Her aim is to get sho and san adopted as part of the Greek alphabet for religious reasons (see also Lingua Adamica on this subject). In my view the best solution, for her own good, is to persuade her to use other sites, not wikipedia, for her propaganda. I can point you to earlier discussions if you're really interested.

The false information was not the links (they are repetitive, semi-relevant and lack Latin labels, but not false). The false information was the claim that she is reverting "slashing vandalism". Andrew Dalby 15:29, 14 Februarii 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note that Opoudjis main page http://www.tlg.uci.edu/~opoudjis/unicode/unicode.html includes all links to all eight Opoudjis sub pages listed above. 209.104.195.64 15:48, 14 Februarii 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Edit of 25 June

I've now tidied up the tables the way I think they should be. Those who know about the Greek alphabet are welcome to correct/improve them! Andrew Dalby 12:22, 25 Iunii 2008 (UTC)[reply]

De antiquissima inscriptione Graeca Gabiis inventa

Ubi, quaeso, mi Xaveri, invenisti quod scripsisti de antiquissima inscriptione Graeca Gabiis nuper inventa? Fontem addendum mihi videtur. Vale, --Fabullus 08:56, 10 Iulii 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Pronuntiatio linguae hodiernae: [e̞] etc.

Quid nobis dicit hoc ̞ parvum ad litteris e et o adnexum? Andrew Dalby 15:44, 21 Octobris 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Displicebitne cui?

Si addam (et scilicet convertam) Herodoti citationem 5.58 de Phoenicico abecedario?--Ioscius ^(disp) 16:58, 12 Novembris 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Adde, quaeso. Cum addideris, capitulum 'Historia' fortasse subdividendum erit. --Fabullus 17:05, 12 Novembris 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Iam converto. Mox aliquid habebimus. --Ioscius ^(disp) 17:24, 12 Novembris 2008 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Linea 64: / Linea 64: @@
 :::She's an obsessive who has been a minor nuisance on many Wikipedias for many years. Her aim is to get sho and san adopted as part of the Greek alphabet for religious reasons (see also [[Lingua Adamica]] on this subject). In my view the best solution, for her own good, is to persuade her to use other sites, not wikipedia, for her propaganda. I can point you to earlier discussions if you're really interested.
 :::The false information was not the links (they are repetitive, semi-relevant and lack Latin labels, but not false). The false information was the claim that she is reverting "slashing vandalism". <font face="Gill Sans">[[Usor:Andrew Dalby|Andrew]]<font color="green">[[Disputatio Usoris:Andrew Dalby| Dalby]]</font></font> 15:29, 14 Februarii 2010 (UTC)
+::::Note that Opoudjis main page http://www.tlg.uci.edu/~opoudjis/unicode/unicode.html includes all links to all eight Opoudjis sub pages listed above. [[Specialis:Conlationes/209.104.195.64|209.104.195.64]] 15:48, 14 Februarii 2010 (UTC)
 == Edit of 25 June ==