[Wikipedia-l] Syriac vs Aramaic

[Sj]

There is an audience for an arc: section of wikisource, at least.   ~sj


On Fri, 8 Oct 2004 10:27:14 -0700, Mark Williamson <node.ue at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi all.
> 
> Just a short question:
> 
> Why is it that we have a Wikipedia for the ancient, dead language
> Aramaic http://arc.wikipedia.org/ - no content currently, but none for
> its modern descendent Syriac (or "Neo-Aramaic"), spoken by millions,
> which according to the ISO code would be at http://syr.wikipedia.org/
> ? Presumably, the number of people who could actually read and fully
> understand an Aramaic Wikipedia would be very low, while the number of
> people who could read and understand a Syriac Wikipedia would be in
> the range of millions of people, almost exclusively native speakers.
> 
> Also there is the issue of what script to write it in: it would seem
> that some people would write Aramaic in the Syriac script, and others
> in the Hebrew script; on the other hand, Syriac is written exclusively
> in the Syriac script.
> 
> I think that ultimately, the existance of arc: is not a Good Thing,
> but that the existance of syr: would indeed be a Good Thing,
> especially as there are people fex the people at the Beth Marduto
> institute who would probably contribute to syr:.
> 
> --node
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
> 


-- 
+sj+   
 _ _ :-------.-.--------.--.--------.-.--------.--.--------[...]