Re: Sequential Fathatan Final Form (Items 9 and 10)

["Thomas Milo" <t dot milo at chello dot nl>]

Could someone post an illustration of Qur'an text in modernized spelling,
for instance with the word /luuTa-n/?

t

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Mohammed Yousif" <mhdyousif at gmx dot net>
To: "General Arabization Discussion" <general at arabeyes dot org>
Sent: Wednesday, June 16, 2004 11:42 PM
Subject: Re: Sequential Fathatan Final Form (Items 9 and 10)


> On Wednesday 16 June 2004 20:12, Thomas Milo wrote:
> > Desperately trying to underpin that U+FD3C and U+FD3D are a colossal
> > blunder
> >
> > :-)
> >
> > t
> >
>
>  Even if they are "colossal bluder", they are used by the most popular
masahef
>  out there so they must be taken into account.
>  BTW: these masahef have passed a very extensive certification process
that
>          involves comparing with Arabic references including spelling ones
but
>         Arabic is a very rich langauge and the fact that one form is
correct
>         doesn't mean that the rest are wrong.
>         As long as they are certified, no one has the right to say that
they
>         are wrong until he goes to the authorities that certified it and
>         question them about it. (They are very knowledgable scholars, for
>         example the current QuranComplex printings are certified with
>         Mohammed Khalil Al-Hosary leading the certification committee
>         and you can find his sign in every mushaf there. Clearly you
cannot
>         say that he and his committee are wrong without any proof like
that)
>
>  The masahef you mentioned is "historic" (no doubt they are important, but
>  the most popular mushaf is of higher priority).
>
>  Moreover, taking into account the most popular mushaf by QuranComplex
along
>  with those Shamarly and Al-Haramain masahef won't contradict with or
break
>  the masahef you mentioned (which are historic)
>
>
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Mete Kural" <metekural at yahoo dot com>
> > To: "General Arabization Discussion" <general at arabeyes dot org>
> > Sent: Wednesday, June 16, 2004 6:51 PM
> > Subject: Re: Sequential Fathatan Final Form (Items 9 and 10)
> >
> > > Thanks for the striking example from the Suhrawardi
> > > Mushaf. It is quite clear in that mushaf that the
> > > fathatan is definitely not on the trailing alif.
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > General mailing list
> > General at arabeyes dot org
> > http://lists.arabeyes.org/mailman/listinfo/general
>
> -- 
> Mohammed Yousif
> Egypt
> _______________________________________________
> General mailing list
> General at arabeyes dot org
> http://lists.arabeyes.org/mailman/listinfo/general