Talk:Proto-Sinaitic script

𐩸 is in which Serabit el-Khadim inscription?

The symbol is shown under the Table of Symbol's "Serabit el-Khadim" column, but I don't know if that is accurate. I can see the symbol in the izbet sartah ostracon's abecedary, but I don't see it in any of the Serabit el-Khadim proto-Sinaitic inscriptions, unless there's a source I am missing? 72.216.186.113 (talk) 15:29, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

As far as I'm aware, you aren't missing anything. I have also been thinking about this matter. I have yet to see the "ziq" symbol in any of the inscriptions.

Therefore, the symbol will be removed from the article unless we find something else, like another inscription. Cnscrptr (talk) 03:35, 18 May 2024 (UTC)

wsr

Fig I / 777 here looks like that shape. This is from Petrie, Lahun II. Macalister also references such a shape in Gezer, and disagrees with a colleague who had a hypothesis about it, I can't remember exactly what. I think they called it "Cypriote script" so if you search for that you might see their opinions on it. Macalister thought it wasn't "Cypriote."

Temerarius (talk) 20:17, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

There's another instance of the shape in pottery marks on the last page of Petrie's Kahun Gurob and Hawara, just linked in my most recent post below. Temerarius (talk) 00:08, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

Hall of shame

As for this page itself, I think the most embarrassing errors are ginap grape, and the duck for tsade. Don't forget good sense for good sources. Temerarius (talk) 02:55, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

The ġinab grape's name was indicated by Colless while its sound value as ɣ comes from Albright. If this synthesis proves true, then likely a part of the glyph or an entirely different one is the origin of said glyph.

The duck for ṯ' was shown by another more recent source.

What are the flaws in these sources? Cnscrptr (talk) 18:05, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

What, seriously? Wilson-Wright's table 5 isn't risible to you? "A more definite conclusion, however, must await" the authors themselves admit. An admitted wild-ass guess isn't encyclopedic. These scholars are usually running the other way, to say "Certainly!"

Temerarius (talk) 00:16, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for noticing that. I removed the glyph accordingly. Cnscrptr (talk) 02:36, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

https://www.academia.edu/40029675

In this one, Wimmer 2010, the authors' first impression (initial gut reaction being crucial according to fakebuster Thomas Hoving) was that the inscriptions were a hoax. And they don't go on to say they were wholly convinced, either. Sounds like they didn't have something better to write about. We probably shouldn't refer to this one either, unless somebody comes up with an interpretation that bolsters its verity.

Temerarius (talk) 19:09, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

As for the ġinab grape, like I said, it came from a synthesis of Colless and Albright's sources depicted in the following pdf already in the TOC section: https://www.unicode.org/L2/L2019/19299-revisiting-proto-sinaitic.pdf However, looking into it, the only thing supporting this assertion is Albright's interpretation as ɣ and Colless assigning a name to a Proto-Canaanite ayn glyph with a dot.

As for the acrophony, it does not match as the Proto-Semitic and Proto-Afroasiatic word for grape is ʿanbab, Arabic (which preserved most merged sounds) is 'inab, leaving Ugaritic as the only one with the ɣ phoneme, failing the acrophony test.

Hence, you were right that the ġinab grape, which I've thought about before, is most likely inaccurate and will therefore be removed from the article. Cnscrptr (talk) 02:33, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Thank you!

Temerarius (talk) 16:09, 11 August 2024 (UTC)

z

https://postimg.cc/fVQpx3BT

https://postimg.cc/G99Wrn4r

Has anyone tried to link z to hieroglyph N23 or N37a?

Temerarius (talk) 21:33, 30 July 2024 (UTC)

head

https://i.postimg.cc/tCnGG2P1/image.png

I haven't double checked anything yet but my first impresion on seing this blobby one on the upper right and lower left was they looked better than D1, D3, D19 and D20 "rs", "tp," et cetera for the blobby one in the evidence. I don't know what hieroglyph that is, I asked refdesk. Temerarius (talk) 02:57, 31 July 2024 (UTC)

Yet more inscriptions? Forgotten evidence from JRAS 1920

I'm not sure if everything mentioned in the intermittently-insightful and humorously triumphant 1920 Journal, Royal Asiatic Society by Rev A H Sayce is in our articles.

https://ia804707.us.archive.org/15/items/in.ernet.dli.2015.24465/2015.24465.Journal-Of-The-Royal-Asiatic-Society-1920.pdf

The "Kypriote" connection is probably a stretch, but the wooden instrument in Petrie's Kahun sounds promising. I've read that book (Weren't there more than one with Kahun in the title?) and don't remember what Sayce is talking about. I'm going to download it again. https://archive.org/details/cu31924028675399/page/n111/mode/2up?view=theater It's pretty funny how Sayce interprets "Kenites" like everyone does when there are better options.

I hesitate to link Sayce here since I worry any of his statements could be taken uncritically, like the comments on plene spelling which are confidence in nonknowledge. Anyway, since the pieces of evidence are so few I'd love if somebody tried to find the pieces mentioned.

And read at least the titles of the other articles in that publication, there's some great stuff.

Temerarius (talk) 00:03, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

h?

https://archive.org/details/Petrie1939/page/n54/mode/1up?view=theater

This one looks like many earlier Semitic script hs. I'm going to try to check on if Petrie's first dynasty dating, obviously early, is based on style or stratiography. Temerarius (talk) 02:49, 11 August 2024 (UTC)