SomaliNet Forums

Both were trying to resurrect the ancient Somali script, so they based their alphabets around the strange, ancient, indecipherable writing found throughout Somalia on old rocks and tombs and whatnot.

This was in an effort to resurrect the ancient past of Somali civilization, which DID exist, in order to have a proud history stretching back as far as Ethiopian or Egyptian or Yemeni civilization. This was important in order to dispel Ethiopian claims that in ancient times Somalia was part of Ethiopia, something Ethiopians still claim.

James Dahl wrote:Both were trying to resurrect the ancient Somali script, so they based their alphabets around the strange, ancient, indecipherable writing found throughout Somalia on old rocks and tombs and whatnot.

This was in an effort to resurrect the ancient past of Somali civilization, which DID exist, in order to have a proud history stretching back as far as Ethiopian or Egyptian or Yemeni civilization. This was important in order to dispel Ethiopian claims that in ancient times Somalia was part of Ethiopia, something Ethiopians still claim.

Bottom line, most Somalis were in favor of the script they were familiar with, the one they used for centuries. But, their Western educated/trained kacaan leaders had another idea.

In the other topic, you claimed the primitive, 7th century-stuck al-Shabaab, who manufacture no arms/weapons, who possess no tanks, warplanes, spy satellites, submarines, drones, etc-- are a threat to the advanced, civilized, nano-tech, plutonium and nuclear-strength Free World. What could be the link between the simplicity of Latin and computer domains? Next time, try to take a pause and screen your comments from non-senses.

Stop connecting two topics that have nothing to do with one another. The Taliban was primitive too, but that didn't stop them from helping Al qadea plot and execute 9/11. And they paid the price.

And the simplicity and efficiency of Latin makes it a computer friendly language. That is why I brought up the fact that until recently, there were no Arabic domain names on the internet. While there were Somali ones because our leaders of the past had the intelligence to pick Latin over Arabic.

union wrote:And the simplicity and efficiency of Latin makes it a computer friendly language.

Is it your personal opinion, or you read it somewhere? I would be interested to read some links that compare Latin to non-Latin when it comes to computer friendliness.

The Latin script seems like the easiest to learn, Arabic has many issues regarding learning it to illiterates (vowel problem). It also saves a lot of time and money that were otherwise spent on special software and whatnot.

I am not a linguist so cannot produce evidence of why Latin rather than Arabic adaptation was/is suitable to the Somali language, but I believe that despite most of us are being clan-freaks, the reason for Latin adaptation was not based on clan preference. It seems like a much debated subject but because of urgency need for mess literacy there was no time for further deliberations.

I am not minimizing the non-religious stanza of that government but I cannot see how that played role in this.

As a Somali speaker, it makes sense to me that Latin is perfectly suited to the role. In an any case, I cannot see any harm it done?

Would have Arabic script made us close to Arabic nations or Islam? I think not. It did not make that Pakistan or any other country closer to Islam.

The "Arabic" script wasn't Arabic, that's the other thing. It was MOSTLY Arabic, but the four vowels in Cushitic languages like Somali that are not present in Arabic require new letters.

It's like the Urdu alphabet.

Somalis are already way too Arabized as it is, adding the Arabic script would be a little over the top, that would make us look like those dumb North-Sudanese. The laughing stock of Africa.

James Dahl wrote:The "Arabic" script wasn't Arabic, that's the other thing. It was MOSTLY Arabic, but the four vowels in Cushitic languages like Somali that are not present in Arabic require new letters.

It's like the Urdu alphabet.

This answers the question that Barmaan posed. It makes perfect sense to me, I hope it does to him too. Sounds like he is looking for something that was not there. Cheese

Mckuus wrote:The Latin script seems like the easiest to learn, Arabic has many issues regarding learning it to illiterates (vowel problem). It also saves a lot of time and money that were otherwise spent on special software and whatnot.

The printing and typing machines of the era were mechanical. We are talking about the 70s.

Walaashiis wrote:Would have Arabic script made us close to Arabic nations or Islam? I think not. It did not make that Pakistan or any other country closer to Islam.

Iran, Pakistan and Turkey (for more than 1000 years) didn't choose the Arabic script to be close to Arabic nations. Turkey, when it was leading the Islamic Caliphate (the longest one), could have changed the script. The Iranians (who don't admire much the Arabs) could have changed it as they had their own (i.e. Safavids) independent empire(s). Farsi, Urdu and Turk aren't even Afro-Asiatic.

James Dahl wrote:The "Arabic" script wasn't Arabic, that's the other thing. It was MOSTLY Arabic, but the four vowels in Cushitic languages like Somali that are not present in Arabic require new letters.

It's like the Urdu alphabet.

Maybe you're talking about shaqal (harakat in Arabic, diacritics) which exists in the Farsi, Urdu and Turkish (during the Caliphate).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ottoman_Turkish_alphabet

I would be interested to know what those missing (I doubt) vowels are, ones that were found in the Latin.

These ones: ee ii oo uu. Arabic has aa so that's fine.

The Latin alphabet solves this by "doubling up" the vowels. The Osmanya, Borama and Kaddare scripts all had special letters for these. Arabic is an abjad though, not a complete alphabet, and the vowels are implied, so no doubling-up is possible, so for the four missing vowels new letters would have to be created.

It is impossible to write proper Somali in Arabic, as words which are different in Somali would be spelled the same in Arabic. For instance kis and kiis would be spelled the same, but have (depending on the context) opposite meanings!

Arabic gets around this problem by using wāw (their w in place of oo and uu) and yāʾ (their y in place of ii and ee) and you could get away with this in some words so long as the context was maintained, but this just confuses matters, is kwl kawal or kuul or kool (as in Kool Aid)? Is Tyl Tiil or Tayl or Tayal? Who knows!

Jamesoow, some of your examples are confusing. For instance, you claim (or imply) kis/kiis are written the same way in Arabic, leading one to figure out what's being meant. In another example, you claim (or imply) that in Arabic, kwl is written, leading to confusion to whether it's meant by kawal (since you admit the a vowel exists, I wonder why it isn't included in kwl, at least to make one comprehension?), kuul or kool. You can clarify your examples by writing it in Arabic, so that I know if (i.e.) kis/kiis is written the same way in Arabic.

all you donkeys

plz shut up



somali latin script is here to stay

qoraxeey wrote:somali latin script is here to stay

I doubt that. If al-Shabaab wins, there's a high probability they will change the script.

Bamaarn wrote:

qoraxeey wrote:somali latin script is here to stay

I doubt that. If al-Shabaab wins, there's a high probability they will change the script.

Alshabaab will not win, Inshaa allaah. Ilaahey ha dhameeyo intaaney dadka ka dhameyn lugaha iyo gacamaha.

before they emputate all Somalis