Talk:Meroitic script

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Writing systems High‑importance This article falls within the scope of WikiProject Writing systems, a WikiProject interested in improving the encyclopaedic coverage and content of articles relating to writing systems on Wikipedia. If you would like to help out, you are welcome to drop by the project page and/or leave a query at the project’s talk page.Writing systemsWikipedia:WikiProject Writing systemsTemplate:WikiProject Writing systemsWriting system articles High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Ancient Egypt Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ancient Egypt, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Egyptological subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Ancient EgyptWikipedia:WikiProject Ancient EgyptTemplate:WikiProject Ancient EgyptAncient Egypt articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. WikiProject Ancient Egypt to-do list: edit history watch purge Needed articles. We should have an article on every pyramid and every nome in Ancient Egypt. I'm sure the rest of us can think of other articles we should have. Cleanup. To start with, most of the general history articles badly need attention. And I'm told that at least some of the dynasty articles need work. Any other candidates? Standardize the Chronology. A boring task, but the benefit of doing it is that you can set the dates !(e.g., why say Khufu lived 2589-2566? As long as you keep the length of his reign correct, or cite a respected source, you can date it 2590-2567 or 2585-2563) Stub sorting Anyone? I consider this probably the most unimportant of tasks on Wikipedia, but if you believe it needs to be done . . . Data sorting. This is a project I'd like to take on some day, & could be applied to more of Wikipedia than just Ancient Egypt. Take one of the standard authorities of history or culture -- Herotodus, the Elder Pliny, the writings of Breasted or Kenneth Kitchen, & see if you can't smoothly merge quotations or information into relevant articles. Probably a good exercise for someone who owns one of those impressive texts, yet can't get access to a research library. Africa: Sudan Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Africa, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Africa on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AfricaWikipedia:WikiProject AfricaTemplate:WikiProject AfricaAfrica articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Sudan. Ancient Near East Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ancient Near East, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Ancient Near East related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Ancient Near EastWikipedia:WikiProject Ancient Near EastTemplate:WikiProject Ancient Near EastAncient Near East articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

The next time someone re-does the pic, could you switch the hieroglyphs (but not the demotic) for "te and "to"; also correct the spelling of "divider"? Thanks...

Reworded. The article was getting a bit garbled. kwami

The infobox says abugida, but the lead says alphabetic. If I am correct, it could be only one of those. -DePiep (talk) 10:03, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Unicode documentation says alphabetic. Changed accordingly. -DePiep (talk) 10:12, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's not quite that simple. /i/ and /u/ were written alphabetically, but /a/ was inherent, as in an abugida. However, since an inherent vowel is a common but not necessary feature of abugidas (at least as Daniels defines them), 'alphabetic' is probably the better choice. — kwami (talk) 10:30, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Of course I wouldn't mind if this was noted in the article or in the infobox. Unicode is not decisive in this, especially since this is described, but not normative nor used by Unicode. It was just a first hit I found. Also, the Hieroglyphs and the Cursive might be different in this. Out of my league. -DePiep (talk) 12:26, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Added a note in the box. AFAIK hieroglyphic & cursive were the same. — kwami (talk) 12:51, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Actually "Abugida" is a neologism which has come into use in the last 15 years only (and not necessarily as widely used in scholarly circles as it is on Wikipedia); before that time, this would always have been referred to as an alphabet. In any case, this is really not like Ethiopian or North Canadian scripts, because there's no componentiality. Rather, it's much more like Iberian/Celtiberian scripts -- a basic alphabet, but a selected (fairly small) number of consonant+vowel combinations are also included. Another comparison could be to Persian Cuneiform. AnonMoos (talk) 13:03, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Are you all looking for semi-syllabary? Old Persian cuneiform was a semi-syllabary. Iberian and "Tartessian" were also semi-syllabaries. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semi-syllabary A.Tamar Chabadi (talk) 16:49, 2 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Why does the info box indication that direction is left-to-right? The contents of the article itself indicate that the script is right-to-left as well as this page ^[1]. Same issue with the cursive article^[2]. 140.180.248.185 (talk) 20:20, 26 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I’m looking for it myself, but I’d think it would be helpful if the article had info on what the script was used for. Not extensive, but simple indication of purpose. Prayers? Astrology? History? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sychonic (talk • contribs) 17:11, 2 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]