Arabic Sript vs. Latin Script
Printed From: History Community ~ All Empires
Category: Scholarly Pursuits
Forum Name: Linguistics
Forum Discription: Discuss linguistics: the study of languages
URL: http://www.allempires.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=22545
Printed Date: 06-Jun-2024 at 19:55
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 9.56a - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Arabic Sript vs. Latin Script
Posted By: Al Jassas
Subject: Arabic Sript vs. Latin Script
Date Posted: 21-Nov-2007 at 09:17
|
Hello to you all
Several countries in the last century changed their writing system from the Arabic script to latin, some even moves to Cyrillic. Intellectuals especially those who are secular or westernized are calling to substitute the Arabic script with the latin one in the last two major languages using the Arabic script, Arabic and Farsi.
My question is is that necessary? I mean changing the script has is literally changing the heart and soul of the entire culture that uses that language in that script. Toynbee said, if I am correct, that when Attaturk changed the script into Latin he simply made a complete cultural coup and Trkey simply lost the entire heritage that was written over hundreds of years and a new culture was born that was simply neither part of the West nor of the east. The linguistic connection to the east were clean cut and the western culture could not establish itself in a society that was not completely detatched from its roots.
Now, when we look to what happened to Turkey, is the change necessary? and why not keep a double writing system like what is happening in the Balkans where all the countries there have both a Cyrillic system and a latin system. Give your thoughts especialy our Turkish and Iranian friends.
Al-Jassas
|
Replies:
Posted By: çok geç
Date Posted: 21-Nov-2007 at 13:50
|
Arabic script is not the developed script of lines only, but an art. Caligraphy is an essential form of art in the Arab culture.
In addition, the past heritage is so deep that it is extremely hard to detach out of it by teaching the newer generation a new script. Arabic to Arabs is similar to Chinese to Chinese. Not only a script or a letter. It is an art, meaning, and continuation of thousands of years of heritage. Regarding Farsi, it was interesting to me to observe a discussion about the possibilities of adopting Latin script to replace the current Farsi font. One response that was posted ?s that if both of the Arabic-Farsi script and the Latin script are introduced foriegn scripts to the original land of Persia, then sticking with the one that connects Persians to their heritage, especially the great poems, rich Persian literature, caligraphy and art, done in the past 1300 years, support the continuation of the Arabic-Farsi script. The issue of turning the script to be phonic can be simply a re-structuring of the script itself without having to replace it. For instance, English is not a phonic language while Spanish is, though both use Latin script. In comparison, Farsi is not a phonic language while Kurdish or Chinese Uyghur script is phonic, though all of them are using a customized form of Arabic script. ------------- D.J. Kaufman Wisdom is the reward for a lifetime of listening ... when youd have preferred to talk. |
Posted By: Lmprs
Date Posted: 21-Nov-2007 at 17:34
Yes, it was a vital part of a modernization process.
And why keep a double writing system at all?
How so? Which country is the successor to Ottoman Empire, if not Republic of Turkey?
And what's wrong with that?
There was no linguistic connection in the first place. Turkish is an Altaic language, Arabic is a Semitic language, Persian is an Indo-European language. ------------- |
Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 21-Nov-2007 at 20:17
| Just for the record, as a curiosity. Spanish is one of the few language that has been written with three different scripts: Hebrew alphabet (or Aleph-bet), Arab and Latin alphabet. Middle ages' Spanish literature have several examples of this. Even today, Ladino, the Sephardite language, which is a variation of Middle Ages' Castillian Spanish, is sometimes written with Hebrew characters. |
Posted By: Al Jassas
Date Posted: 21-Nov-2007 at 21:47
|
Hello Feanor
Is this the reason why Turks are clueless about their identity, the west does not accept them and their connection to their great heritage is non existant. As for my suggestion, I think what I said is not ditch latin and return to Arabic, because this is as big a mistake as the first one. My suggestion is teach arabic so that people can really know their great heritage which is spread through libraries and museums and only a few can read. You will not translate that heritage so you might as well teach it in its original form.
A final question to you is what was the modernization that happened to Turkey after it became a republic. As far I as understand Turkey was and still is a poor country with a large percentage of rural population and a huge agrarian economy as well as a relativly high illteracy rate compared to Europe. Al-Jassas
|
Posted By: xi_tujue
Date Posted: 21-Nov-2007 at 21:48
|
the onlyones who can't read is the Kurds who live in small mountain villeages tbh
------------- I rather be a nomadic barbarian than a sedentary savage |
Posted By: Bulldog
Date Posted: 21-Nov-2007 at 22:27
What does a script have to do with "modernization", I cannot accept the notion that modernity is connected to a script its ridiculous.
The only logical reason I've ever read for this script change was that the Arabic script was not easy to apply to Turkish but it couldn't have been too difficult, Turkish literature flourished using the Arab script.
Clueless? would you like to explain.
I don't know where you got that their connection to their heritage is non-existant, its not the case at all.
Its a script, a script can be learned in a few weeks, Turkish can be written in Arabic, Chinease, Latin even the old Turkic script, its not a big issue.
Turkey is among the 20 most powerfull economies of the world and rising.
Adult literacy in males is 95% woman 80%
Turkey isn't a part of Europe, compare her to the region. ------------- “What we do for ourselves dies with us. What we do for others and the world remains and is immortal.” Albert Pine |
Posted By: The Hidden Face
Date Posted: 21-Nov-2007 at 22:37
|
Good topic. How many countries changed their writing system from the Arabic script to Latin? As for Turkey. The idea of changing the script into latin was first discussed by Young Ottomans in the 1870's. The Ottomans were suffering from the duality so much then. Everything was two headed: Western one and Eastern one. Young Turks and Kemalists simply chose the Western civilization. A Young Turk, Ziya Gokalp said that from now on Turkey would move together with the West instead of the East. Al Jassas, Turkish economy is the largest economy in the Middle east without a drop of Oil - And almost two times bigger than Egypt or Saudi Arabia, and the second largest economy in the whole Islamic World right after -230 Million People- Indonesia. As you said since Turkey has a large percentage of rural population, this means that this economical growth is because of highly westernized-urbanized-secularized Turks of 15-20 million, who lives mainly in western Turkey, especially in the Marmara region. When Turkish westernization is completed (Still needs at least 100 more years I think), Turkey will become a western class country. Which all means that what Ataturk did is the right thing. And Western States accept Turkey. That's the whole thing actually, Al Jassas. The West accepted Turkey immediately when Turkey decided to be westernized. It's the people of Western states that refuse Turkish people thinking that Turkish people are racially, historically, linguistically or spiritually not Westerner. But Western States accept Turkey as a "Western state." It's more about states in this case. |
Posted By: DayI
Date Posted: 21-Nov-2007 at 23:18
|
somewhat i think we should keep that Ottoman language or writing system to know what actually was written by Ottomans. Turkey is successor of the Ottoman empire so we should be the ones who can read what our ancestors did wrote on their graves, documents, etc etc ANd I do think we did make many mistakes to be westernize our country, we should westernize our country by not changing the script, banning the fez, turkifyng arabic selaa or ezan but by industrializing our country, having a decent democracy like taking the good fruits of a tree. Look at Japan or China, did they changed their script, banned their previous cultural elements to be powerfull as many western country's are? ------------- Bu mıntıka'nın Dayı'sı http://imageshack.us - [IMG - http://www.allempires.com/forum/uploads/DayI/2006-03-17_164450_bscap021.jpg - |
Posted By: Lmprs
Date Posted: 21-Nov-2007 at 23:18
I beg your pardon? Who are you to make such a bold statement?
'The West' is not equal to EU. That's something different altogether. Turkey is accepted by the West in many ways.
No, it's not. Turkey has a modern, secular administration, but it also has great respect for Ottoman cultural achievements.
This is getting confusing. You mean the script, or the language? Not that it would make a difference though. It's stupid either way.
What does that have anything to do with this? We would be richer than UK if we kept Arabic script? Cool.
That and many other things as well. It was just a part of it as I previously stated. ------------- |
Posted By: Lmprs
Date Posted: 21-Nov-2007 at 23:24
There is a big difference. Turks were under the strong influence of a foreign culture - Arabic - unlike Japanese or Chinese. ------------- |
Posted By: Bulldog
Date Posted: 22-Nov-2007 at 00:10
|
[quote]The_Hidden_Face
this means that this economical growth is because of highly westernized-urbanized-secularized Turks of 15-20 million, who lives mainly in western Turkey, especially in the Marmara region. [/quote]
A few corrections.
- Highly westernized-urbanized-secularized Turks are the sole people responsible for Turkey's wealth.
This is a ridiculous statement.
- Urban dwelling is nothing new, it has nothing to do with westernization or secularization.
- Proove there are 15-20 million Westernized Turks.
- Proove there are 15-20 million Secularized Turks.
Here's something that'll put a spanner in your works, Turkey isn't becomming more Western or Secular, infact its going in the opposite direction and more sucesfull as a result. Turks are learning to embrace their own cultural identity and promote this instead of being a cheap immitation.
Given the choice which would you have.
A new original Apple Ipod
Or a cheap, imitation I-pod that breaks after a few days.
While the immitator tries to copy originallity, originallity will be devloping more original products.
And in addition to this, you seem to be forgetting that the its not the secular westernized Turks who are taking the country forward, its the conservatist, religous Turks who are comfortable with their identity. The Anatolian Tigers are the sucess story of today, their dynamism is making them the driving force in the country.
Cities like Konya, Kayseri, Gaziantep etc are developing and living conditions are better than cities in the West, they have less shanty towns and have rejected Westernization.
You seem to be stuck in a time loop, its like your stuck in the 1900's.
In the real world it doesn't matter anymore if you are in the East or West, there are even more developed countries in the East today, were living in an era of globalisation, countries can co-operate with whoever is in their interests.
This fixation of being Westernization is a backwards, retarded mentallity of people with inferiority complexes.
 Is that what the Turkish media tells you.
No, Western states don't accept Turkey as Western and don't have any intentions of either.
Your contradicting yourself.
A key aspect of the West today is "democracy", which is supposed to represent the peoples of the land.
If the people don't accept Turks as European and the people are the state then there is nothing you can argue with.
Turkey is not Western, never will be, doesn't have an obligation to be, get over it. She can have relations with the West but cannot be part of it.
Turkey won't be let into the EU, public opinion is against joining the EU, the time is getting ripe for change in country, you have to be blind not to see this, people are fed up and want alternatives. ------------- “What we do for ourselves dies with us. What we do for others and the world remains and is immortal.” Albert Pine |
Posted By: Bulldog
Date Posted: 22-Nov-2007 at 00:18
This is historically incorrect.
Turks were not under a strong influence of a foreign culture.
Turks conquered foreign cultures and took what they liked from them.
Infact the total opposite can be argued today.
------------- “What we do for ourselves dies with us. What we do for others and the world remains and is immortal.” Albert Pine |
Posted By: Lmprs
Date Posted: 22-Nov-2007 at 00:59
Incorrect. Pre-Islamic Turks didn't conquer Muslim Arabs. They served them as slaves or mercenaries, and took the control much later on. ------------- |
Posted By: malizai_
Date Posted: 22-Nov-2007 at 03:29
Since the Young Turks killed off the Ottoman state and created a state antithetical to Ottomanism, i do not see how they could be described as the inheritors/successors. Since Ottoman pluralism was displaced with the adopted philosophy of Western Secularist Nationalism, i don't see how the two can be reconciled.
It is like the Antichrist being the inheritor/successor to Christ.
AFAIK the only people that held Ottomanist Ideals in the end were Muslims of the sub-continent, later segregated by the national boundaries of India, Pakistan etc. When Kemal banned the Fez in Turkey the Muslims of Indo-PAk took onto wear it with greater enthusiasm. I hope u c my point.
------------- |
Posted By: Omar al Hashim
Date Posted: 22-Nov-2007 at 05:21
|
Indeed Malizai, ideologically, Pakistan is much more of a successor to the Ottomans than the Republic of Turkey. I think Rep. Turkey is no more of an a successor than the state of Syria, or Iraq. I also agree with Bulldog, westernised secular nationalists are loosing their influence all over the word. Including in Turkey. Whether you like it or not, secular nationalism is last centuries idea. I personally, would not be surprised to see traditional turkish script (ie arabic) becoming more popular over the next 100 years. ------------- |
Posted By: Al Jassas
Date Posted: 22-Nov-2007 at 08:21
|
Hello to you all
My first response is the the Hidden Face and it is WAKE UP. Secularist "intellectuals" have been selling the notions of westernization and modrnization, and finally joining the worst organization in history, the EU to the people raising false hopes and what was the response, you are not and will never be part of europe period. For 40 years Turkey was backing europe under the false hope that one day they will be accepted and to what resul, into their faces was a big NO. The secularist intellectuals made Turkey the laughing stock of the Arab states, and indeed the entire western world, which are a complete failure compared to Turkey because the gave everything up for the sake of Europe and the result was a resounding IN YOU DREAMS. Serbia which was responsible for the Balkan wars, and Croatia which still refuses to give Serbians their lands back are candidated for the EU and in several years will full time members and Turkey which is far more democratic then them or most of the other states recently accepted which were not 20 years ago sworn enemies to the EU. Wake up man, Turkey is not pat of Europe and this is not a bad thing or an indication for inferiority. Turkey economy6 has been growing more than 7% in the last 5 years and the average growth of the EU countries was 1.5 % if I am not wrong.
As for Feanor, if you really knew anything of your own heritage you would have known that the Persian culture was, and still is, the main influence on Turkish art and literature not Arabic.
More later
Al-Jassas
|
Posted By: Bulldog
Date Posted: 22-Nov-2007 at 13:09
Pre-Islamic Turks and the Arabs fought together against the Chinease at one point.
There were Turkish mercenaries and slaves your correct, however, they did pretty well for themselves don't you think, if ever there was a case of slaves owning their masters Turks would be among the most sucessfull of these.
I appreciate your point, however, we must not forget that Muhammed Ali Jinnah was a keen supporter of Ataturk and was inspired by his resistance war against the Brittish, infact Jinnah's daughter would refer to him as, Grey Wolf.
The peoples of Turkey are inheritors of the Ottoman era, the old capital lies within their terretory and their grand-fathers fought for the Ottomans.
The muslims of the Indian Sub-continant and Turks have strong bonds, infact during WW1 the muslims from this region provided alot of support even though they wern't under Ottoman rule.
If they were in the Arab lands instead of Arabs its likely the Ottomans may have succeeded in the war but these are just "what if" scenarios and not very relevant to reality.
Persian influenced Turkish, Turkish influenced Persian, Persian influenced Arabic, Arabic influenced Persian etc etc
All have had influence on each other, all have fused and have borrowed.
The typical arguments of certain extremists is to pretend that they were under some sort of strangle hold by the so-called oppressor, Turks liked to blame Arabs, Arabs like to blame Turks and so on.
They both are as ridiculous as each other.
And they both don't like it when you question them about if the Turks or Arabs were so bad and your so against "foreign imposed culture", why don't you have a problem with foreign culture being imposed when it comes from the West. ------------- “What we do for ourselves dies with us. What we do for others and the world remains and is immortal.” Albert Pine |
Posted By: Lmprs
Date Posted: 22-Nov-2007 at 15:31
|
You guys are missing a huge point. Why did pro-Western secularist nationalism emerged in the first place, huh? Can it be because Ottoman Empire was in constant decline and Ottoman society was clearly becoming more and more backwards in comparison to Europe which was brought down to its knees by Ottomans themselves just a few centuries ago? Or maybe it was the revolting minorities in Balkans, Caucaus and Mideast? Every single mechanism of the state was in rust and it was obvious that Ottoman Empire was going to fall. Reformists tried everything, including 'imitating Western science & technology, but staying away from its culture' thing as some people on this thread are suggesting as if it's an original idea. Well, it simply didn't work. And things turned out as they did.
malizai, Ottomanism was not the basis of anything. It was just another ideology to save the future of the empire in a conservative way. It was not more deep-rooted than Young Turks at all. They are all parts of a historical period which lasted a century. The Ottoman state was founded as a typical medieval kingdom, and a empire later on, but ideologies didn't exist back then. As for 'Syria, Iraq, Pakistan being similar to Ottoman Empire more than Turkey': Well, this statement tells more about you and your view of history, rather than Republic of Turkey, in my opinion. 'A typical Islamist delusion' I'd say if I had to guess, but actually I'm unsure why would anyone claim such an absurdity. Al Jassas, firstly I'm tired of your attempts to lecture me at every turn. Secondly I know that Ottoman Turkish resembled Persian more than any language, I just tried to point out that Turks were under the strong effect of Arabic culture overall. You and other Muslims may view Islam as a universal message to guide human beings in some ridiculous test of a deity, whereas I think it's a gigantic part of Arabic culture. Omar al Hashim, of course Arabic script will not be more popular than Latin script in Turkey. This shows how clueless you are. If you don't believe me, ask Mortaza or OSMANLI. Mortaza will probably say that he doesn't find either one superior or inferior to each other and that your prophecy is baseless. And OSMANLI will probably say that he prefers Arabic script, and also that your prophecy is baseless. ------------- |
Posted By: Al Jassas
Date Posted: 22-Nov-2007 at 17:26
|
Hello to you all
I think this thread has gone out of its original path for many reasons, so I will rewrit here the purpose of the thread because it is dangerously going out off topic.
My main goal is not whether Arabic script is superious to latin or vise vesa or whether Turkey should return to Arabic script or Farsi and Arabic should ditch it. The main question is: Is it worth it?
Changing the script literally means detaching a language from it old roots and detaching society of its entire written heritage. Is this worth it? If the society chose the switch then its the society's who wants the boycott but if the government chose that, is it their right to steal centuries of national treasure and impose their own version. This is what happened in Turkey and Central Asian republics and nearly happened to Iran when the Shah wanted to do it but wa stopped by the intellectuals of Iran who knew what this meant to the cultural heritage of Iran. My question, is it worth it.
Al-Jassas
|
Posted By: Bulldog
Date Posted: 22-Nov-2007 at 20:45
Science and technology is not "imitated", science and technology can be learned and improved upon.
Culture however, can be imitated, while understanding technology is a science ie it can be fully understood and utlised but culture cannot, culture is the product of a nation or nations the events and situations in those lands shape the culture. Another nation cannot "copy" a culture, they can never fully understand or be a part of something they are not.
Turks under the stong effect of Arabic culture as much as Arabs were under the strong effect of Turkish culture, especially in the Levant region.
Why then did the muslim Turks become most powerfull among Turks? how did they become world super powers ruling from Kashgar to Kazan from Delhi to Damascus. How did the Turkish language become recognised as a great world language in the muslim world alongside Arabic and Persian. How did the Turkish arts and culture flourish etc etc
Now look at non-muslim Turks, Christian Bulgars have a tantrum when you mention Bulgars are Turks, the other non-muslim Turkic groups are small minorities who didn't produce great states like their muslim bro's did.
Please explain this, what logic do you use to come to the conclusion that it is just "Arabic culture" when Turks have achieved so much since becomming muslim.
------------- “What we do for ourselves dies with us. What we do for others and the world remains and is immortal.” Albert Pine |
Posted By: Bulldog
Date Posted: 22-Nov-2007 at 20:50
There is no superior or inferior script.
Its just a script, it has nothing to do with language, it does not detach it from old roots or society from its entire written heritage.
Anybody can learn any script they like. You can write Japanease in Latin script or Arabic script if you wanted but Japeanease is Japanease whatever script is used this doesn't change.
For Turkey and Central Asia it really doesn't matter if they use Arab or Latin script, they are neither Arab or Latin.
You surely cannot be as naive to think that changing a script creates some mass memory loss and changes people on the spot.
Anyway I think its beneficial to learn different scripts you never know when they can come in handy. ------------- “What we do for ourselves dies with us. What we do for others and the world remains and is immortal.” Albert Pine |
Posted By: Lmprs
Date Posted: 22-Nov-2007 at 21:59
Al Jassas, Ottoman Turks were mostly a nation of peasants. I don't know the exact percentage of illiteracy, but I'm sure it's high enough to prove that they couldn't enjoy their rich culture as you continuously claim. Besides, today the ones who are enthusiastic about Ottomans can learn its language in its own script very easily. Why should history play a significant part in everyday life?
Yes, they can Mr. Bulldog. How else Turks could become Muslim & Middle Eastern when they originated somewhere around Mongolia or Siberia?
Really? How many Arabs in Syria or Lebanon have Turkish names? How many Turkish words are there in Arabic language? If it was not for Ataturk's reform, our language would be filled with foreign words. But loanwords weren't destroyed either, so Turkish has become pure and even more richer, at the same time. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_replaced_loanwords_in_Turkish - List of Replaced Words in Turkish ------------- |
Posted By: Bulldog
Date Posted: 22-Nov-2007 at 23:07
This is a totally different issue.
Turks themselves became muslim, Turks migrated across Turkistan through the Near East and across the middle east.
These Turks culture is there own culture, sure they borrowed aspects of the cultures they met and lent parts of their culture to others.
However, the key point is, Turks developed this, it was what they created and was shaped by their surrounding and situations.
Do you know any Syrians or Lebanease?
Baybars is a popular name in the Levant, you can hear names like Agha, Khan etc my Syrian friend knows many Turkish words and terms and says some Turkish words are popular in colloquial language. He is from Aleppo/Halab and his father plays a baglama.
There have been cultural exchanges between Arabs and Turks especially in the regions they lived closest together.
The language of a court invents terms and uses language in a way that people of that class will understand. This is the same in countries with royal households, for example the Queen's English has differences to the peoples English.
There can be a justification of Arabic words in Turkish, they have had a historical connection for over a millenia now living under the same states.
However, how can you justify Turkish words being replaced with French words? why arn't you outraged about this? today alot of Turkish people I talk to are disgusted with some segments of the media and their awfull use of Turkish, they feel ashamed that these so-called intellects try to stick foreign words into their language to appear more intellectual. ------------- “What we do for ourselves dies with us. What we do for others and the world remains and is immortal.” Albert Pine |
Posted By: Al Jassas
Date Posted: 23-Nov-2007 at 00:17
|
Hello Bulldog Since you claim that the Turkish language and identity did not suffer from the change then I will ask the next very simple question: Has all the Arabic script turkish literature been translated into modern Turkish and is it available for the common Turkish person? If the answer is yes then the argument is completely invalid for Turkish but if no, then you must admit that an integral part of the Turkish heritage is lost.
But the argument for the detachment stays for a language like Arabic or Farsi. For example there are over 1000 poets of significance who lived in the first 300 years of Islam. The Entire arabic heritage is maybe over 3 million books and any argument that says that changing the script will not affect the heritage and culture of people speaking that language is just absurd. Who the hell is going to translate all that heritage or even the good portion of it. Just like turkey post Ottoman, nearly 60% of the Arab population is either half or fully illiterate so changing the script will be rather simple especially in places with high illiteracy rates like morocco and Yemen. But to those newly taught, how can they establish a connection between their present latin written and their past. I think this is a legitimate argument.
AL-Jassas
|
Posted By: Bulldog
Date Posted: 23-Nov-2007 at 00:52
Ofcourse, even the books written by the founder of the state was written using the Arabic script. The major works of literature are all translated because afterall its a script, its not like translating from a language to another. Todays Turks have acess to their forefathers literatures.
However, there has also been a loss.
For example, a Turk who cannot understand the Arabic script cannot read even what is on their grandfathers tombstones.
However, if they knew the Arab script they could understand it.
This is why I feel its important to have knowledge of the script, it should be taught in state education. Even though most important materials are easily translated there is so much that is not significant on a large scale but important on a pesonal level that would be understood better, it also is enriching to have knowledge of different scripts.
------------- “What we do for ourselves dies with us. What we do for others and the world remains and is immortal.” Albert Pine |
Posted By: Lmprs
Date Posted: 23-Nov-2007 at 00:55
No, it's not. You think that way because you are a religious person. Turkish elites decided to be like Arabs when they thought that it would serve their interests, and they decided to be like Europeans when the time was right.
No, but I know many Turkish people and they mostly have Arabic names like Ahmet, Mehmet rather than Turkic ones. And I know that 4,000,000 Turkish women are named as Fatma. So what's the figure for Syria or Lebanon? ------------- |
Posted By: Bulldog
Date Posted: 23-Nov-2007 at 01:03
Proove they decided to be like Arabs, infact show me these many examples of Arabic culture in Turkish society, if Arabs had Turks in some strangle hold like you make up then there Turks should all have Arab customs and traditions.
How can you feel so inferior that your willing to try and be a part of a culture which you don't belong to and never will be accepted into.
Why can't you just be yourself.
These are religous names, and they gave these names freely, Arabs didn't force them too. ------------- “What we do for ourselves dies with us. What we do for others and the world remains and is immortal.” Albert Pine |
Posted By: Zagros
Date Posted: 23-Nov-2007 at 01:09
|
lol. I am sure that most people are not aware of where the name they give their children originates. My great grandmother thought that Ali and Muhammad were Iranian! No joke. She was illiterate. On my father's side the older uncles have Arabic names like Gholam-Hossein, Gholam-Reza, Abdul-Reza, the younger ones have Iranian names like Bahman and Bahram. This is over a period where my grandparents became less superstitious and stopped naming their children with Islamic names (I am not sure whether they were aware that the names were Arabic or not, only Muslim as far as they were concerned).
My point is that certain things become tradition within a society and their roots are often forgotten. In Turkey now, it seems that trash culture has taken a grip of a portion of the society and if that is beyond a simple fad then it too will become traditional and seen as Turkish over time. And I simply use Turkey as an example. ------------- |
Posted By: Styrbiorn
Date Posted: 23-Nov-2007 at 01:15
Scripts and languages evolve over time. There is absolutely nothing you can do about it. Foreign words will always find their way into different languages. I used to be annoyed with it; nowadays I just accept it, and avoid using the most silly English terms that so often make their way into Swedish. What's the harm - it's not that you can talk with your ancestors anyway. Those ancestors in turn spoke a different language then their ancestors, and this iterates all the way back to the days of the language of grunting. We used to use runes, now we also have adopted the Latin alphabeth since it's more efficient. If I want to read runes, I can just learn the runic alphabeth (which I have, by the way) - it's more beneficient to be able to read other languages of my contemporary world. Languages evolve, and be happy for that. Otherwise it would be *grunt* *grunt* everywhere. |
Posted By: Lmprs
Date Posted: 23-Nov-2007 at 02:53
Written by a pan-Islamist... Wow, what a great example.
There is no such thing. ------------- |
Posted By: Omar al Hashim
Date Posted: 23-Nov-2007 at 05:09
Christopher and Abudullah would be quite surprised to hear this. I think Christian and Islam would be rolling in laughter. ------------- |
Posted By: Lmprs
Date Posted: 23-Nov-2007 at 05:17
|
Abdullah means 'the slave of god' in Arabic. And Christopher is 'the English version of a Europe-wide name derived from the Ancient Greek Χριστόφορος (Christóphοros)' according to Wikipedia. ------------- |
Posted By: Al Jassas
Date Posted: 23-Nov-2007 at 08:41
|
Hello tou you all
Well since you claim that all "major" works were translated, then by which authority have you decided if this work is important or not. FOr example, let us assume that French turned by some majic into an Islamic state back in 1890 and the institute regulating the language decided to switch to Arabic, then by you reckoninig, a poet like Rimbaud would have remained obscure to this day because he simply sold very little of his work and it was only in after WWI he became popular. If english were to change into the Arabic script James Fennimore Cooper would have been considered the preeminent novelist of America while Herman Melville's work would have been lost forever maybe (imagine a world without Moby-Dick). If Arabic chose latin when this was first suggested back in the 19th century the entire Andalusian heritage and much of it is far much better than eastern heritage would have been lost since the attitdudes were very hostile and it was only recognized as great literature back in the mid 20th century. So, who has the authority to determine which is which?
And Styrbiorn, if the question was as simple as what you have suggested, then why the hell waste time to discuss it. But the problem is not that simple. How many literary works have been written in runes, practically none so why learn it. But in the case of Arabic, Persian and to a lesser extent Turkish, you are talking about literally millions of books that in total contain the mass memory of the people. Who is going to translate all that work. While this will not be a problem in the first two generations, after three generations non except a few will be able to decipher the old heritage and it will go to obscurity and forgetfullness and you will have a generation that simply has no connection to its roots.
Al-Jassas
|
Posted By: Akolouthos
Date Posted: 23-Nov-2007 at 08:45
Well, doesn't that prove the following statement false?
-Akolouthos
|
Posted By: Lmprs
Date Posted: 23-Nov-2007 at 20:51
The same authority you seem to possess when you are criticizing a social reform which you probably know very little about. Al Jassas, you may, of course, say what you think, but if you want to have some credibility, you have to provide some evidence. Say, which Ottoman artist, whose works were really popular from his lifetime till the fall of the empire, lost his status after Republic of Turkey decided to switch its script to Latin and purified Turkish language from foreign influences? Or will you claim that the common people could understand the value of some artists eventually, many years after their deaths maybe? Well, perhaps, or perhaps not. It's not right to make comments on baseless assumptions. But what happens to the artists who were born in the path which was set by Republic of Turkey? Let me guess... They were all wannabe Europeans, and unworthy of existence? You don't make any sense if you think that way.
No, on the contrary it proves my previous statement. Abdullah, and Islam, are Arabic names, not Islamic ones as there is no Islamic names since there is no Islamic language. The same thing goes for Christopher and Christian which were deriven from ancient Greek. ------------- |
Posted By: Crystall
Date Posted: 23-Nov-2007 at 21:49
You only have the turkish government to blame for that... banning all kurdish language and writing all those years.. perhaps turned them off learning turkish
|
Posted By: Bulldog
Date Posted: 23-Nov-2007 at 22:26
He wrote your national anthem man.
I don't claim, you can read works dating back the Kashgarli Mahmud or the Gok-Turk monuments if you like.
Its not rocket science to write the same language in different scripts, as I said they are just scripts not languages.
So everybody called Adam in the UK and America are Arabists in disguise ------------- “What we do for ourselves dies with us. What we do for others and the world remains and is immortal.” Albert Pine |
Posted By: Akolouthos
Date Posted: 24-Nov-2007 at 05:54
Well, it doesn't really prove your statement, unless you have some case you haven't made yet. Your statement was that there was no such thing [as religious names]." You have demonstrated that Abdullah has a religious connotation, and I assume this is the context in which it is often understood today. Christophoros means "Christ bearer." So you see, there is such a thing as religious names, and your previous statement is false.
You mean they're not?
-Akolouthos
|
Posted By: Al Jassas
Date Posted: 24-Nov-2007 at 08:25
|
Hello to you all
Well since its not rocket science, why don't you learn the script and tell us how easy that was. Then, go and try to find these books and try to read them.
And Feanor, my criticism of "social reform" that happened in Turkey is irrelevent, I just asked a simple question, who has the authority to rob an entire nation of its written heritage, is it unelected "intellectuals" or the nation that wasn't asked. I read very little of Turkish literature but a lot of english and Arab literature to no that the Turkish literature did not come from Mars, and that what is correct in the case of english and Arab literature is definitely going to be correct for the Turkish literature.
Finally guys, seriously, I never said that Turkey should return to Arabic or even the original Turkish script, My question here is the change worth it. Is it going to transfer Iran or Arab countries into world powers. Is it going to increase literacy and make every one as great as Al-Jahiz or Saadi. Because remember, in two generations time not even one tenth of the heritage is going to be translated and nearly the entire population will not know the old written and tell me who is going to teach 200 million Arabs or 40 million Iranians the old text.
Al-Jassas
|
Posted By: Killabee
Date Posted: 28-Nov-2007 at 00:02
My two cents:
Actually China did simplify their script during the Cultural Revolution in '60s. There were some talk that PRC Government want to further "simplify" it by romanization of Chinese character but they faced strong opposition even within the Communist party.Traditional Chinese script is only preserved in Taiwan, Hong Kong and Macau while they have no problem reading ancient Chinese books, mainland Chinese youth are having difficulty to read them because they do not recognize many Traditional Chinese characters.
Both Japanese script (Hiragana and Katakana) are derived from Chinese Calligraphy. Chinese characters (Kanji) are used on daily basis as well along with Hiragana and Katagana. Unlike the Korean and Vietnamese who underwent de-sinization in their written language, Japanese are proud of keeping and incorporating Chinese Characters into their written language.
|
Posted By: Killabee
Date Posted: 06-Dec-2007 at 23:31
|
I think Indonesian and Malaysian also changed the script from Arabic script to Latin but since the root of Islam is not long ,so it didn't create a turmoil like the Turk faced. According to Wikipedia, there is currently a revival of Arabic Script in both countries.
The Uyghur Turk in Xinjiang province of China are still using Arabic Script as far as I know.
|
Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 07-Dec-2007 at 07:20
The Bosnian Arabic script is similar to the Turkish one, but it has been out of use for decades now, too. I believe it ended being used before or around the time that Ataturk's reforms.  ------------- |
Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 07-Dec-2007 at 07:21
 ------------- |
Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 07-Dec-2007 at 07:31
|
btw the Turkey - Bosna match for the EC 08 qualifier was very friendly :), and here too Turks have an affinity towards Bosnians that certainly didn't change over centuries now on to the topic Yes we should emphasize script learning more to adopt it as a secondary script especially in cases such as this. In recent years there are a lot of Bosnians that can read it, including also Turkish and Persian. A lot of literature in Bosnia was produced in Persian in the 18-20th cts. ------------- |
Posted By: erkut
Date Posted: 07-Dec-2007 at 10:29
|
Hello Al Jassas;
First, yes its worth it. Latin script is easier then arabic one.
Second, we didnt lost anything. Everybody could learn Ottoman script in Turkey. Mostly literature and history students learns Ottoman script in universities, also there are many translations of old scripts. ------------- |
Posted By: bgturk
Date Posted: 07-Dec-2007 at 11:11
I think one of the main reasons to replace the Arabic script was in order to reduce illiteracy among the population. Latin was simpler, and better suited to express the nuances of sounds in the Turkish language. I do not see any benefit for Turkey staying with the Arabic script. ------------- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TJHmQvFNydA - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TJHmQvFNydA |
Posted By: kotumeyil
Date Posted: 07-Dec-2007 at 12:32
Well, this issue was discussed before and I'm pasting my older words here:
------------- [IMG]http://www.maksimum.com/yemeicme/images/haber/raki.jpg"> |
Posted By: kotumeyil
Date Posted: 07-Dec-2007 at 12:36
------------- [IMG]http://www.maksimum.com/yemeicme/images/haber/raki.jpg"> |
Posted By: Spartakus
Date Posted: 07-Dec-2007 at 12:43
|
I must thank Ataturk for replacing the Arabic script with Latin, thus making easier to learn Türkçe.
------------- "There are worse crimes than burning books. One of them is not reading them. " --- Joseph Alexandrovitch Brodsky, 1991, Russian-American poet, b. St. Petersburg and exiled 1972 (1940-1996) |
Posted By: Lmprs
Date Posted: 07-Dec-2007 at 12:49
|
I believe kotumeyil has concluded this issue. Hopefully we'll not be bothered further by people who think they know what's best for us. ------------- |
Posted By: gcle2003
Date Posted: 29-Dec-2007 at 10:35
In the light of this week's news, that isn't saying much for the Ottomans. ------------- |
Posted By: azimuth
Date Posted: 06-Apr-2008 at 02:54
the #1 point is the only major reason mentioned above, the rest came after just for the sake of making more reasons lol. another major reason is to get the population away from their religion and tradition ( which is also a political thing to get closer to the west) sadly for many secularists it seems like the west wont fully accept you as one of them until you leave your Turkish language and off course insult your islamic history to show them how much you like the west. ------------- 
|