[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Standalone Superscript Alef (Item 8)
- To: General Arabization Discussion <general at arabeyes dot org>
- Subject: Re: Standalone Superscript Alef (Item 8)
- From: Mohammed Yousif <mhdyousif at gmx dot net>
- Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 00:57:42 +0300
- Cc:
- User-agent: KMail/1.6.1
On ثلاثاء 15 يونيو 2004 23:32, Mete Kural wrote:
> > again wrong, the alef is not on the Waw at all, it
> > is before
> > it (I can give you scans if you want).
> >
> > Logically it cannot be on the Waw at all, it's a
> > small letter using
> > instead of the missing Alef, would you put the alef
> > on the waw?
>
> If the superscript alif is shifted to the previous
> letter
No, it's not shifted to the previous letter, it's between the Waw and
the previous letter, exactly like the missing Alef.
> than you get the sequence fatha- superscript
> alif anyway. This is because all examples write
> /aa/ with fatha and alif on top of the syriac rasm for
> /oo/ (with waw).
>
That's exactly why it won't work:
"you get the sequence fatha- superscript alif anyway"
EVERY small Alef in the Qur'an has a fatha preceding it.
> However, this assumption is not correct: the function
> of the superscript alif in these cases is to indicate
> thet waw should be alif, therefore the superscript
> alif technically belongs to waw.
>
Mete, what you call an assumption is a fundamental Arabic rule.
I gave you a proof that the small alef is used instead of the alef,
you cannot put and Alef on a Waw, Alef is not a haraka, it's a
_standalone_ letter.
And even if you are correct, it's still preceded by a fatha
(look at any sample and notice the haraka on the prev char)
Anyway, since you are rejecting Arabic rules without justification, I won't
continue like that.
The same problem from another angle:
Take the samle I gave later 2 "Al-Baqara" 2
ذالِكَ ٱلۡكِتَـٰبُ .
(The first Alef after the Thal is the proposed character 8)
Note here that:
1. the first small alef is preceded by a fatha and "ذَ"
2. the second small is preceded TOO by a fatha "تَ"
For 1, the alef must be rendered as a regular character (similar to U+06E6)
For 2, the alef must be rendered high using the existing character U+0670
See? I can list more samples where the 'fatha' indicator won't work
(Actually, ALL of the Alef's in the Qur'an have a preceding fatha because
this is a rule that has no exceptions)
--
Mohammed Yousif
Egypt