Talk:Sogdian language
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
"This early script was taken from the Aramaic script and was almost solely ideographic." - Aramaic was not ideographic, how could Sogdian became one?
"...is in the Sogdian Script that has its roots in the same Aramaic script and like Middle Persian, contains many Logograms?." - as far as I know neither Middle Persian nor Sogdian contained NO Logograms.
I going to edit the article if no evidence of those statement are provided here.
[edit] Logograms and Ideograms
Aramaic was not ideographic, but Pahlavi and Sogdian were greatly ideographic (or as it is called now, heterographic, and called Arameograms by some). Logogram is just another name for it.
The process of the formation of ideograms in Pahlavi and Sogdian are quite complecated, but have their roots in the scribal practices of the Achaemenid administration. If you read the original Pahlavi and Sogdian texts, they are full of logo/ideo/hetero/arameograms! (e.g. BRA for "pus" and MN for 'az').
---
It is definetely not the same thing as ideograms and logograms usually understood, so I would either use "heterogram" or explain in details what is it all about. And, by the way, is there any evidence that Aramaic heterograms were actully 'pronounced' as Pahlavi/Sogdian words, not like foreign words, as they were spelled?
For example, English is never called 'highly ideographic language' however it has more than half of the words taken from Latin and French. Vassili Nikolaev 01:02, 24 Dec 2004 (UTC)
[edit] Aramaic
I wikilinked Aramaic, but it doesn't seem to be correct? Please clarify the sentence. --Pjacobi 13:59, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)
I recorded this article as a spoken article but didn't know the correct pronunciations--phonetic helps? NB
Sounds good, but here's a couple for the next edit:
- Achaemenid - a-kigh-men-id
- Manichaean - man-ick-key-an