Talk:Clear script

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In Xinjiang the Mongols are not called Kalmyk! It is considered derogatory.

[edit] change title

I think this article should be titled "Todo script" (or even "Clear script"), in line with other similar articles. Any objections? --Latebird 23:58, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Todo bichig, Todu bičig, Todo bičig, Todu üsüg, Tod üseg, only to mention some variants available for transcribing that title. Thus, only for "Todu", there are three variants. Therefore, the most suitable title would be "Clear script". G Purevdorj 13:28, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

The exact transliteration is a seperate question (that would depend on the final form of Wikipedia:Romanization of Mongolian). A fully english title is of course best, if that is considered appropriate. I'm going to rename the article then.

Btw: Is the clear script really specifically kalmyk? Most sources seem to list it as a mongolian script. --Latebird 14:09, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] characters image

I've updated the picture to a png, which ought to be better. If anybody knows the IPA and either changes that or gives me the IPA so that I can change it that would be very nice. Also this is all the letters that showed up last time, is it all the letters?--Erkin2008 23:39, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

The vertical layout is much better, thanks! For the latin characters in the table, I think that scholarly transliteration would be most appropriate (it's a linguistic topic). A table for classical Mongolian can be found at Mongolian.pdf, although I'm not sure if there is an obvious correspondence for all characters of the Clear Script.

Now I just wish we had a similar character table for classical Mongolian.... --Latebird 15:14, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Sample Texts

I can't seem to decipher this very well. If somebody can, and posts the latin that would be very helpful to whoever would come here. I also can then put it in the standard font. --Erkin2008 21:08, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Um, don't we have any examples that are more appropriate for the predominantly buddhist context than bible verses? --Latebird 07:40, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

I think most of the Bhuddist documents were in Tibetian, some of them were translated into Kalmyk is well I think, but the Tibetian ones were used the most. --Erkin2008 20:12, 5 April 2007 (UTC)