<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: In defence of silent letters</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.blogistan.co.uk/blog/mt.php/2008/05/21/in_defence_of_silent_letters/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.blogistan.co.uk/blog/mt.php/2008/05/21/in_defence_of_silent_letters</link>
	<description>Politics, tech and media issues from a Muslim perspective</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 Feb 2012 17:32:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: George Carty</title>
		<link>http://www.blogistan.co.uk/blog/mt.php/2008/05/21/in_defence_of_silent_letters#comment-18585</link>
		<dc:creator>George Carty</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 26 Nov 2009 20:02:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.blogistan.co.uk/ijwp/mt.php/2008/05/21/in_defence_of_silent_letters#comment-18585</guid>
		<description>Didn&#039;t the Ottoman Empire have an abysmal literacy rate, because its script was so ambiguous?  (Vowels are far more important in Turkish than in Arabic.)

One famous example was محمد پاشا اولدو, which can mean either &quot;Muhammad became a Pasha&quot; (&quot;Mehmet Paşa oldu&quot; in modern Turkish), or &quot;Muhammad Pasha died&quot; (&quot;Mehmet Paşa öldü&quot;).  I read that Ottoman writers tended to use a lot of Perso-Arabic circumlocutions to avoid such ambiguities.

The Bosnian Muslims managed to make a &lt;a href=&quot;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arebica&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;true alphabet based on Arabic script&lt;/a&gt; (although it later fell out of use), so why did the Turks struggle on with their dysfunctional script until Ataturk came along and junked it in favour of the Latin alphabet.

Why oh why couldn&#039;t the Tanzimat reformers have insisted that from then forward that written Turkish be fully vocalized?  (They&#039;d probably need to invent more markers as Turkish has eight vowels to Arabic&#039;s three...)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Didn&#8217;t the Ottoman Empire have an abysmal literacy rate, because its script was so ambiguous?  (Vowels are far more important in Turkish than in Arabic.)</p>

<p>One famous example was محمد پاشا اولدو, which can mean either &#8220;Muhammad became a Pasha&#8221; (&#8220;Mehmet Paşa oldu&#8221; in modern Turkish), or &#8220;Muhammad Pasha died&#8221; (&#8220;Mehmet Paşa öldü&#8221;).  I read that Ottoman writers tended to use a lot of Perso-Arabic circumlocutions to avoid such ambiguities.</p>

<p>The Bosnian Muslims managed to make a <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arebica">true alphabet based on Arabic script</a> (although it later fell out of use), so why did the Turks struggle on with their dysfunctional script until Ataturk came along and junked it in favour of the Latin alphabet.</p>

<p>Why oh why couldn&#8217;t the Tanzimat reformers have insisted that from then forward that written Turkish be fully vocalized?  (They&#8217;d probably need to invent more markers as Turkish has eight vowels to Arabic&#8217;s three&#8230;)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Old Pickler</title>
		<link>http://www.blogistan.co.uk/blog/mt.php/2008/05/21/in_defence_of_silent_letters#comment-667</link>
		<dc:creator>Old Pickler</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 02 Jun 2008 00:44:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.blogistan.co.uk/ijwp/mt.php/2008/05/21/in_defence_of_silent_letters#comment-667</guid>
		<description>Excellent post. I totally agree. You write very well.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Excellent post. I totally agree. You write very well.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Indigo Jo</title>
		<link>http://www.blogistan.co.uk/blog/mt.php/2008/05/21/in_defence_of_silent_letters#comment-666</link>
		<dc:creator>Indigo Jo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 May 2008 10:36:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.blogistan.co.uk/ijwp/mt.php/2008/05/21/in_defence_of_silent_letters#comment-666</guid>
		<description>Partly because it was what I was brought up on, but I find it to just be more balanced than any of the other major broadsheets.  It does not have the obvious pro-US, neo-con bias of the Times nor the inward-looking, little-Englander, old Tory slant of the Telegraph, although I sometimes read the Telegraph&#039;s website and have posted stories and opinion columns from there in the past, and I don&#039;t care much for the hysteria of the Independent&#039;s front pages with its dull, conservative opinion columns behind it.  Also, the Guardian seems to have more of a features section than the others - I know exactly what to expect from the G2 insert and the special supplements are meaty and interesting (compare the Media Guardian to the media section in the Indy on Monday).  I do not always agree with what their writers say, but it rarely scares me unlike the Telegraph&#039;s &quot;Will Cummins&quot; affair of 2004 and the frothing bigots which have made it into their letters pages.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Partly because it was what I was brought up on, but I find it to just be more balanced than any of the other major broadsheets.  It does not have the obvious pro-US, neo-con bias of the Times nor the inward-looking, little-Englander, old Tory slant of the Telegraph, although I sometimes read the Telegraph&#8217;s website and have posted stories and opinion columns from there in the past, and I don&#8217;t care much for the hysteria of the Independent&#8217;s front pages with its dull, conservative opinion columns behind it.  Also, the Guardian seems to have more of a features section than the others - I know exactly what to expect from the G2 insert and the special supplements are meaty and interesting (compare the Media Guardian to the media section in the Indy on Monday).  I do not always agree with what their writers say, but it rarely scares me unlike the Telegraph&#8217;s &#8220;Will Cummins&#8221; affair of 2004 and the frothing bigots which have made it into their letters pages.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: George Carty</title>
		<link>http://www.blogistan.co.uk/blog/mt.php/2008/05/21/in_defence_of_silent_letters#comment-665</link>
		<dc:creator>George Carty</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 22 May 2008 19:41:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.blogistan.co.uk/ijwp/mt.php/2008/05/21/in_defence_of_silent_letters#comment-665</guid>
		<description>On the subject of Romance languages, the thing that amazes me is that the word &lt;i&gt;ojalá&lt;/i&gt; survived the Spanish Inquisition.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On the subject of Romance languages, the thing that amazes me is that the word <i>ojalá</i> survived the Spanish Inquisition.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: M Risbrook</title>
		<link>http://www.blogistan.co.uk/blog/mt.php/2008/05/21/in_defence_of_silent_letters#comment-664</link>
		<dc:creator>M Risbrook</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 22 May 2008 18:38:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.blogistan.co.uk/ijwp/mt.php/2008/05/21/in_defence_of_silent_letters#comment-664</guid>
		<description>Why is the Guardian your favourite newspaper?
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Why is the Guardian your favourite newspaper?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Umm Salihah</title>
		<link>http://www.blogistan.co.uk/blog/mt.php/2008/05/21/in_defence_of_silent_letters#comment-663</link>
		<dc:creator>Umm Salihah</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 22 May 2008 14:54:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.blogistan.co.uk/ijwp/mt.php/2008/05/21/in_defence_of_silent_letters#comment-663</guid>
		<description>Assalam-alaikam,
half of the UK can&#039;t spell as it is, add that to text language and eliminating silent letters and everyone would be writing in their own way.  Languages evolve, but in 100 different directions in one go?
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Assalam-alaikam,
half of the UK can&#8217;t spell as it is, add that to text language and eliminating silent letters and everyone would be writing in their own way.  Languages evolve, but in 100 different directions in one go?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Hussain</title>
		<link>http://www.blogistan.co.uk/blog/mt.php/2008/05/21/in_defence_of_silent_letters#comment-662</link>
		<dc:creator>Hussain</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 21 May 2008 23:43:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.blogistan.co.uk/ijwp/mt.php/2008/05/21/in_defence_of_silent_letters#comment-662</guid>
		<description>Salams, silent letters do my head in, especially being dyslexic, it does&#039;nt help at all. As for French being the most beautiful language in the world, lets just say, &#039;Renault&#039; sounds beautiful hey...
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Salams, silent letters do my head in, especially being dyslexic, it does&#8217;nt help at all. As for French being the most beautiful language in the world, lets just say, &#8216;Renault&#8217; sounds beautiful hey&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

