Talk:Pahlavi
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Does Sasanian Iran have anything to do with the Sassanids? If so, the word should be spelt with a double S.
No, it should not! Sasanian is the correct and academically accepted form. It is not pronounced with a double s and there is no reason for it!
In the article, what is the sentence "it is closely related to Sanskrit" refer to? Middle Persian? If that is the case, then the statement is wrong. Middle Persian is not closely related to Sanskrit! The relationship between Sanskrit and Middle Persian is like the relationship between Middle English and Old High German. Not that close!
I have removed a large chunck of the beginning of the second paragraph because of inaccuracies. What exactly is meant by the other Middle Iranian languages "falling into disuse"? While those languages may no longer survive, the descendants for some of them do. If, instead, it is meant that textual sources from these languages do not survive, this may be true for some (such as Bactrian, I believe), but not of others (for example Sogdian). Also, I dont believe that texts and knowledge about Pahlavi Middle Persian survived to the 20th century solely as a result of transmission by Parsi Zoroastrians in India.
I also cleared up the inaccuracies about whether Middle Persian is Iranian, Zoroastrian, or Sasanid. According to linguistic terminology, it is only the first. Zoroastrian and Sasanid do not possess any value as terms describing linguistic or genetic affiliation. Also, I made clear the contrast between Pahlavi as a writing system and as a language, and further contrasted it with Manichean Middle Persian.
Contents |
[edit] What???
The word Pahlavi, refering to the script of Middle Persian, itself is a borrowing from Parthian (parthau "Parthian" --> pahlaw). The word originally refered to the script (and probably language) of Parthians which was also derived from Aramaic. Middle Persian Pahlavi script was derived from Aramaic independently, although Inscription MP Pahlvi is quite similar to Inscription Parthian Pahlavi.
- The Parthians spoke an Iranian language, not a Semitic language derived from Aramaic. I'm going to rewrite it to remove the ambiguity. --Jpbrenna 21:57, 2 May 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Ok...
I did some fixing and organizing and I added the alphabe template, since Pahlavi script is technically an Aramaic-derived alphabet. I need some help though. Can anyone:
- Clarify Psalter Pahlavi? Does "the Psalter" mean the Hebrew Psalms or the Zorroastrian Yashts that form part of the Avesta?
- Dig up a few good public domain images of Pahlavi script?
- Please smack me if I do anymore editing today instead of studying for my finals?
--Jpbrenna 22:39, 2 May 2005 (UTC)
- Per Daniels & Bright,
- A variant of the Persian script used for writing on paper is the so-called Psalter script, known from a fragmentary manuscript of the Psalms of David found in Chinese Turkestan.
- kwami 21:29, 2005 July 21 (UTC)
Hi! I am not an active contributor to the Wikipedia, but I would like to call your attention to the fact that the page omniglot.com which you give as a link for Pahlavi script is IMHO complete crap. I am only learning how to read Pahlavi but the letters on omniglot are only confusing. Please see ancientscripts.com under Pahlavi (which you also link to) for a much clearer table, which corresponds with the one we have at uni in McKenzie's text book.
For good (very good) images of Pahlavi script check http://titus.uni-frankfurt.de/didact/idg/iran/mpers/mpersbsx.htm and http://titus.uni-frankfurt.de/didact/idg/iran/mpers/mpersibx.htm
Best, oliver
[edit] examples
any picrures of ancient writings written with pahlavi scripts can be uploaded if anyone has?
[edit] Computer representation
It would be good if someone could add a section to this article regarding use of the Pahlavi script on computers. Specifically, is the script available in Unicode or any other standardized character encoding? —Psychonaut 02:51, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] ISO 15924 code
Hi. The ISO 15924 standard has been updated with the Phlv (133) to represent "Book Pahlavi". I don't know anything about this language, but if I have understand the article correctly "Pahlavi" and "Book Pahlavi" are two different scripts, so this code shouldn't be added to the {{Infobox Writing system}}, isn't? Best regards, —surueña 14:23, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
Book Pahlavi is the most common kind of Pahlavi. -- Fullstop 15:43, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Time period
The infobox says that the attested time period is approx. from 2 BC to 17 CE, however the hypothetical period is shorter! (approx from 3 BC to 10 CE). If this is not an error, I don't know what is it. Best regards —surueña 14:27, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
- The problem is that the time period is in centuries, not years, and of course it should be 7th century CE and not 17th century. I've modified the article. —surueña 14:36, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
-
- Thats your own fault. :) You changed "3rd c. BCE" etc to "c. 3 BC." What you overlooked was that 'c.' is a common abbreviation for "century." Yes, it *also* means circa, but it didn't here.
- And no, 7th century is not correct. The bulk of all Pahlavi literature is from the 9th-12th centuries, trailing out to the 14th. And yes, as late as the 17th century, people were evidently writing it, because at least one text (albeit presumably based on older sources) is from that period, and copyists continued making copies of older manuscripts until that time.
- When you encounter the word "Pahlavi" in academic sources (the Encyclopedia Iranica for instance), the texts being referred to are those from the 9th-14th centuries. The Middle Persian from the Sassanid Period is not called Pahlavi. Its called Middle Persian.
- -- Fullstop 15:42, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Pazend Movement? (in Sasanian Pahlavi)
This is the first time I've heard anything about a Pazend movement, as far as I've heard until now the Pazend are simply the MP commentaries explicating the Avesta, and were certainly not part of any political movement as described here. It would seem then that Iranians began efforts to clean their language of wicked Semitic influence way back in the Sasanian period and are still up to it 18 centuries later!
-
- Jasper Zanjani (talk) 15:58, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] doesnt make sense
MIddle Persian not Middle Iranian First of all, Pahlavi is the old Persian language, it is the mother of modern Persian, so stop calling it middle Iranian cause that doesnt make sense,So are you all trying to say that we spoke middle Iranian during Achemiand Persian,Parthian and sassanian empires and not Persian? Think before you write, please, am changing it to Middle Persian. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.100.142.110 (talk) 21:35, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
- Actually, it does make "sense"; it only didn't make sense to you because you didn't read.
- This article is not about what you think it is, and the articles for the languages you are thinking of are Old Persian, Parthian and Middle Persian.
- While there was a time when "Pahlavi" meant "old", that was in the 9th-11th century, when certain people continued to write in the "old" language and script even though both were antiquated. That language is not the "mother of modern Persian."
- So, yes, "think before you write, please, am changing it ... " back.
- -- Fullstop (talk) 00:47, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
Pahlavi is middle Persian, I dont need a non Iranian to tell me sh1t about my own language, I am changing it back. Stop trying to change things and stop acting like a facist. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.100.142.110 (talk) 00:48, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

