Talk:Old Persian cuneiform

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

Ancient Near East Top‑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 Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. Iran High‑importance High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. 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.

I find this paragraph very confusing: While a few Old Persian texts seem to be inscribed during

I added this section but forgot to login —Preceding unsigned comment added by Scs237 (talk • contribs) 20:04, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Overall good adds. Maybe add a little bit more about how the rest of script was deciphered. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.84.72.241 (talk) 20:02, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I thought you added a lot of value information especially the entire history section. But one possible improvement you could make is elaborating on how Old Persian is different from today's Persian. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hkl23 (talk • contribs) 22:21, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is a very good start; it was very thorough. However, you could add more information about how it is written (such as left to right) and what other writing systems are similar to this one.

Also, you could add more citations within the article. In the history section, there are none!

I can't see the original characters either with Google Chrome or IE7. Is there a trick so that the original characters are visible? Or maybe the special characters can be shown as images, since I would expect modern browsers might have some difficulty rendering scripts that are no longer used. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 170.51.1.160 (talk) 02:02, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have a problem pretty similar to that of the user above. I've downloaded and installed the fonts that are linked to first under "External links" but could not get them to display in the article after restarting. Where are the fonts used on this page to be found? I'm grateful for any help. Trigaranus (talk) 14:22, 21 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Same problem here. Supposedly a Unicode font. Using FF. Does Old Persian need to be specified with a span element? Weird thing is, I used to edit this article, and it displayed just fine then, and I haven't deleted any fonts. — kwami (talk) 03:47, 1 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

IPA values for the glyphs should be provided. ZFT (talk) 20:30, 2 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

From the article:

Scholars today mostly agree that the Old Persian script was invented

Am I correct in reading this as ‘most scholars think this script was designed by a person, or small group of people, rather than grown over time or descended from a parent system’? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.61.180.106 (talk) 18:07, 10 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I think this guy mentioned in the current version never existed. It must have been a mistake by Samuel Noah Kramer. The correct name should be Antonio de Gouvea, as said here (in italian). Pequod76 (talk-ita.esp.eng) 23:29, 19 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I did this. See this Italian article for further reference. --Pequod76 (talk-ita.esp.eng) 22:26, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The sounds are unclear, please add ipa to the chart. What do you mean by c and ç? Art3mist6 (talk) 13:38, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"The consonant symbols that depend on the following vowel act like the consonants in Devanagari. Vowel diacritics are added to these consonant symbols to change the inherent vowel or add length to the inherent vowel."

I suspect that this is some kind of misunderstanding or unintentionally misleading reformulation - the cited source (Daniels) should be checked. The second sentence is true of Devanagari, but I don't see how it is true of Old Persian cuneiform. There is no systematic similarity between signs for different consonants with the same vowel (indicating the existence of a 'vowel diacritic'), nor between signs for the same consonants with a different vowel. This is just a set of unrelated, arbitrary signs for each consonant-vowel combination, as in a pure syllabary (except for the signs that don't depend on the vowel, obviously), so it doesn't work like Devanagari at all. Or perhaps what is meant by 'vowel diacritic' are the vowel signs added after the consonantal ones, but they are separate signs and aren't united graphically with the signs they precede in any way, and, again, the difference between the preceding consonantal 'elements' that remain when you remove the vowel 'diacritic' has no counterpart in Devanagari. 62.73.69.121 (talk) 10:09, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]