Talk:Š-L-M

Untitled

Man, this is hard... My dad is trying to teach me the basics of SLM, he knows this stuff and has books about it, but im still learing. Anyhow, its no as easy as some people belive, its not only a "peace"/"submission" issue... --Striver 14:27, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Arabic roots aren't things that can be strictly "learned" they're more like a set of loose associations. This article presents them as being coherent conceptual categories, which is not a very helpful exposition 71.229.63.50 21:41, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Deletion recommended

This is one of the worst articles I've ever seen. Were one to remove the poor and unsourced translations, there would be hardly anything left. Wikipedia is not even an etymological dictionary of the English language, much less of Arabic. Even so, if it must remain, it deserves some actual sources, not just Wikipedians making things up based on their own uninformed and presumptuous guesses.Proabivouac 00:34, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

שלמא

There is no good reason for showing the Hebrew letters seen,lam,meem,alef. If there is good reason for showing these letters in Aramaic, and one fears that there are few people who can read them, and one wants to transcribe them, please transcribe them in smaller letters in Latin, Arabic, Hebrew, Cyrillic, Greek, Devnagari, Armenian, .... 85.178.119.129 (talk) 12:02, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

mil-lit-hemملتهم —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.222.18.136 (talk) 06:10, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

ܫܠܡܐ‎ is NOT "Aramaic"

The opening sentence of this article mistakenly states that ܫܠܡܐ is an Aramaic word. This word/script is actually Syriac, which while a dialect of Aramaic, is NOT Aramaic itself and is not written with same script. I tried to correct this error, but could not figure out how to do so. ‎-- 03:41, 23 October 2010 75.204.246.154

Syriac is one language in the Aramaic language group... AnonMoos (talk) 06:59, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

First letter

Is the first letter S, Š or Ś? (Compare Q-D-Š -- YPNYPN ✡ 23:05, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

It's س in Arabic, ordinary ש in Hebrew, /š/ in "old" reconstructions of proto-Semitic, and often /s/ in "new" reconstructions of proto-Semitic. AnonMoos (talk) 02:13, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

So does that mean that shin and samekh are the same, if they're both /s/? -- YPNYPN ✡ 02:34, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Nope; here are the basic correspondences: AnonMoos (talk) 05:07, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Arabic	Hebrew	Proto-Semitic ("old")
س	ש shin	/š/
س	ס	/s/
ش	ש (sin)	/ś/

So if they are different, why don't we make that clear by using /š/ for shin, /ś/ for sin, and /s/ for samekh? In other words, why don't we rename the article to match the facts? -- YPNYPN ✡ 05:19, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Because the article started out being mainly about Arabic (don't think there's any other reason)... AnonMoos (talk) 11:57, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

So should I change Q-D-Š to Q-D-S for consistency? -- YPNYPN ✡ 14:04, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Doubt it -- most usage of q-d-s in Arabic is ultimately a loan or calque on Hebrew or Aramaic q-d-š. AnonMoos (talk) 19:32, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

My point is just that the articles should be consistent. A visitor to Wikipedia won't realize that the last letter of Q-D-Š is the same as the first letter of S-L-M. One of them should be changed. -- YPNYPN ✡ 19:51, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

The inconsistencies are because some root articles were originally started mainly with Arabic mainly in mind, and others apparently not. I don't oppose a rename of S-L-M to Š-L-M, just not sure I see a burning need for it... AnonMoos (talk) 03:41, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

So are you saying that there's no reason it's the way it is, and that you don't mind a move? -- YPNYPN ✡ 05:32, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Feel free to move it if you want to; I'm just not sure that such a move is required... AnonMoos (talk) 18:14, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

 Done -- YPNYPN ✡ 18:43, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Arabic adjective

Does anybody know the correct adjective of salām ("peace") in Arabic, perhaps: salimī or salamī or ...? 79.251.64.214 (talk) 11:56, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

The adjective, peaceful, is: silmī سلمي (spoken "silmee") 79.251.108.159 (talk) 02:55, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

Requested move 18 December 2014

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: not moved. No apparent consensus here. Number 57 14:27, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

---

Š-L-M → S-L-M – The use in Arabic and East Semitic languages outweighs other usages. In any case, use of the S in Hebrew relates to the use of a letter form, ש, which if, in modern times, is given a diacritic dot in to the top right of the letter, will be pronounced "Sh" but if it is given a diacritic dot to the top left, will be pronounced "S". Nikud, diactitic type marks were only relatively recently added to texts and it is hard to say how things would have been pronounced in earlier times. Arabic has Salaam while Hebrew has Shalom. Arabic has Islam while Hebrew has Jerusalem (which in Hebrew is pronounced Yerushalayim). Yes, Islam has a verbal link to peace. I see no reason why this connection cannot be fairly presented.
Now, as an abuse of talk page access, I'd like to share one of my favourite songs, sung by Iraqi-Israeli performer Mosh Ben Ari, then of the band Sheva, The song with its repeated but hopeful point is the wonderful Salaam, translation as in the Wikipedia article here. It chokes me every time . GregKaye ✍♪ 07:03, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

I reject the notion as though Wikipedia should make a point, whatever it is. Including the point that the word Islam has a connection to the word for peace. The same connection as the word Jerusalem, indeed. Perhaps the proposing editor would care to remove that phrase from his proposal, which is already misused as a place to propagate music. I have no opinion as to the linguistic merits of the proposed move. Debresser (talk) 16:01, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

The article titles on of most of the Semitic alphabets are Hebrew (why?). We will need a wider and deeper discussion for coherency. --Fauzan^{✆ talk}_{✉ mail} 17:18, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

Debresser The main point is that the S-L-M root is more used in the S-M-L form than in the Š-L-M. I hope that you had a chance to listen to the music which is something I have not done before. I hope you enjoyed. GregKaye ✍♪ 20:48, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

Š-L-M is Hebrew and conventional proto-Semitic, while S-L-M is Arabic. It entirely depends on what you want the title to do... AnonMoos (talk) 23:38, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

@AnonMoos:, Arabic is also a Semitic language. Why would you consider "Š-L-M" to be conventional? --Fauzan^{✆ talk}_{✉ mail} 04:46, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

See table under "05:07, 7 January 2013" above; the Proto-Semitic reconstructed phoneme corresponding to Arabic س and Hebrew ש is usually represented as "š" (though doubts have been raised in recent decades as to whether this is completely historically accurate). AnonMoos (talk) 05:36, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

I am not a linguistic expert, but can read and write Arabic. س is always pronounced as an "s" and "ش" always as "š" or "sh". So from an Arabic (at least since c.500 CE) point of view "س ل م" transliterates to "S-L-M" only, no "š" or "sh" sound is involved. There does not exist any triliteral ش ل م (ei. Š-L-M) root. The only reason the title has an "š" is because it is so in some of the Semitic languages, I guess?. --Fauzan^{✆ talk}_{✉ mail} 18:01, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

If you don't know what Proto-Semitic is, please consult the article. AnonMoos (talk) 07:14, 20 December 2014 (UTC)

What has Proto-Semitic to do with my above comment? --Fauzan^{✆ talk}_{✉ mail} 04:42, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

As far as I can tell, you never seemed to fully understand my remark of "23:38, 18 December 2014" above; if you had more exposure to comparative Semitic linguistics, then you would have understood it... AnonMoos (talk) 15:51, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

MUSHLAM & MUSLIM

Why MUSHLAM means PERFECT and MUSLIM rest to MUSLIM or translated to SUBMITTED ?

SUBMITTED TO WHAT ? DEVIL ?

MUSLIM contain the root SLM, so SALAM, this mean WHOLE, SAFE, INTACT, PEACE, PERFECT, COMPLETE ... So it means; Who is whole, perfect, safe, intact, peacful...

MUSLIM like MUSHLAM means;

Who is Peaceful, Who make Peace, Who is Submitted to Peace, Who is Perfect, Who is Complete.

And ISLAM like LehAshlIm;

Submission OF Peace, Completion to The Peace, Perfection to The Peace.

PS: - ''Dîn is not Religion, but Religion is a part of Dîn. - ISLAM is not a Religion, but a " style of living, way of acting, behavior... " That's what Dîn means, it's an " Entire Code of Life. " and Religion is a part of ISLAM.

Thanks.