Hi everyone,
>>This is right, of course, in so far as Ge'ez is an important language
>>within comparative Semitic studies.
Pso> Is it not also a liturgical language that is currently used as such?
Yes. In fact, that's where it's mainly being _used_, as opposed to being
subjected to academic scrutiny :-)
Pso> I agree that Romanisations of various scripts is quite another
Pso> matter, and would involve a number of changes in this list, but I
Pso> don't think that's an issue for the Ge'ez entry.
Hm, Ge'ez in Latin transcription, which is what a large portion of
Semitists use, can be represented in Unicode as well
Pso> Note that the entry for Latin doesn't list a country. On the other hand, it
Pso> may make sense to list a country if liturgical usage is predominantly in
Pso> certain countries only.
That makes sense.
Maybe one could introduce another abbreviation such as
"[4] = In use only for transliteration of the language"
and thus add the transliteration scripts for the languages? For
languages such as Arabic or Chinese where the Latin and Cyrillic (only
for arabic) transliterations enjoy rather extensive use in the
linguist community, it would allow them to see if they can write their
transcribed academic work using unicode as well.
We'd then have, for example:
Chinese - Han, Latin[4]
Arabic - Arabic, Latin[4], Cyrillic[4]
Oh, and another thing, the Irish entry should probably list the
Ogham[3] script as well.
Grüße,
Philipp mailto:uzsv2k@uni-bonn.de
__________________________
Nuke the gay, unborn, baby whales for Jesus.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Mon Jul 30 2001 - 14:13:40 EDT